Legal Opinion · Dissent

Kansas & Colorado Pacific Railway Co. v. Burns

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided January 7, 1905No. 13,884Published

Error from Reno district court; Matthew P. Simpson, judge.

1DissentClark A. Smith, J.

(dissenting) : This must be construed as an action in the nature of ejectment, brought under section 595 of the code (Gen. Stat. 1901, § 5082), although the allegation of the plaintiff’s amended petition is “that plaintiff is the owner of, and entitled to, the possession” of the real estate therein described, instead of that plaintiff “has a legal or equitable estate therein and is entitled to the possession thereof,” as prescribed by the code. The *630defendants filed a general denial to this amended petition, as authorized by section 596 of the codé (Gen. Stat. 1901, § 5083).

At the trial the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Pittsburgh, Ft. Wayne & Chicago Ry. v. PeetSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
  2. Southern Pacific Co. v. BurrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  3. Hurd v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1888
  4. O'Brien v. BugbeeSupreme Court of Kansas · 1891

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

Powered by the Exa API