Spratly v. Putnam Fire Ins.
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from Leavenworth County. The entry on the record in the court below was as follows: “And now comes the said plaintiff, by his attorney, James MeCahon, Esq., and the said defendant having been duly served with a summons herein, and he still failing to answer or demur to the petition of the plaintiff filed herein, and makes default.
Read the full summary
Error from Leavenworth County. The entry on the record in the court below was as follows: “And now comes the said plaintiff, by his attorney, James MeCahon, Esq., and the said defendant having been duly served with a summons herein, and he still failing to answer or demur to the petition of the plaintiff filed herein, and makes default. It is considered by the court here that the said plaintiff ought to recover his damages herein; and it is ordered by the court that the cause stand in its order on the trial docket for the assessment thereof.” On the 11th day of September, 1868, at the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Sarrord, J.
This is a proceeding brought to reverse an order of the district court of Leavenworth county, setting aside a default made by the defendant in a cause pending in said court, and giving said defendant leave to file an answer to the plaintiff’s petition upon the payment of costs.
disobetiohaby mg DefauE. The application to open the default, and for leave to answer, was addressed to the disere*159tiou of the court and supported by affidavit, the object of which was to show that the defendant had a meritorious defense to plaintiff’s claim.
That the court had the power to allow…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Brown v. HolmesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1874
- Clark v. SpencerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1875
- First National Bank v. WentwortSupreme Court of Kansas · 1882
- Freeman v. HillSupreme Court of Kansas · 1891
- Swerdsfeger v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1879
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.