Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Darling v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided December 7, 1907No. 15,260Published

Error from Sedgwick district court; Thomas C. Wilson, judge.

1ConcurrenceBurch, J.

(concurring specially) : As I understand the matter, three sentences of the foregoing opinion express views of the court respecting the grounds for denying the motion to dismiss. They are that we must follow the procedure prescribed in the statute, that an instructed verdict is nevertheless a verdict, and that uncertainty and confusion would likely follow if any other interpretation of the statute were to be adopted.

One other consideration is important, and that is the good to be derived from allowing trial courts to review upon a motion for a new trial rulings made under the stress attending…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Wagner v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1906
  2. Sullivan v. Phenix InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1885
  3. White v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1906
  4. Van Tuyl v. MorrowSupreme Court of Kansas · 1907

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

Powered by the Exa API