Legal Opinion

Burrell v. Horchem

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided February 7, 1925No. 25,671PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Burch, J.:

The action was one for damages resulting from an automobile accident occasioned by negligence of the defendants. Charles Horchem’s motion for judgment on the opening statement of counsel for plaintiff was sustained, and Harold Horchem’s objection to the introduction of evidence in support of the petition was sustained. Plaintiff appeals.

Issues are made by pleadings, not by opening statements, and a trial may not be ended on plaintiff’s opening statement unless some fact be stated or some admission be made which precludes recovery. (Brashear…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Denton v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1913
  2. Harrod v. Latham Mercantile & Commercial Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1908
  3. Brashear v. RabensteinSupreme Court of Kansas · 1905
  4. Bailey v. DodgeSupreme Court of Kansas · 1882
  5. Fowler Packing Co. v. EnzenpergerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1908

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Priestly v. SkourupSupreme Court of Kansas · 1935
  2. Millar v. SemlerOregon Supreme Court · 1931
  3. McCoy v. FlemingSupreme Court of Kansas · 1941
  4. Parman ex rel. Parman v. LemmonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1925
  5. United Gas Pipe Line Co. v. JonesMississippi Supreme Court · 1959

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API