Urquhart v. Smith
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from Johnson County. The facts of the case sufficiently appear in- the opinion of the court. 1. The action of the justice was clearly erroneous, as well as the action of the district court in affirming the proceedings of said justice, as their action was not justified by proof.
Read the full summary
Error from Johnson County. The facts of the case sufficiently appear in- the opinion of the court. 1. The action of the justice was clearly erroneous, as well as the action of the district court in affirming the proceedings of said justice, as their action was not justified by proof. U. P. B. B. Co. v. Comers, 4 Kas., 206; Bayer v. Cockrill, 3 id., 283; Harrison, et al., v. King, et al., 9 Ohio St., 388; Castor v. Paige, 9 id., 397; Noyes v. Hewitt, 18 Wend., 141; Dodge v. Coddington, 3 Johns., 146; Harttv. Leaoenworth, 11 Mo., 629; Bybee v. Kinote, 6 id., 53; Lambert v. Sandford, 2 Black/.,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Sahford, J.
This was an attachment proceeding, originally commenced before a justice of the peace, within and for the county of Johnson. After the issue of the attachment order, and the seizure of certain property thereunder, the defendant in said proceeding, now plaintiff in error, attempted to procure a release of the property attached under and by virtue of the provisions of section fifty-three, chapter eighty-one, General Statutes.
But the justice refused to discharge the attachment or any of the property which had been taken by virtue thereof. To this decision "the defendant…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Watson v. JacksonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1880
- Grimestad v. LofgrenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
- Laue v. Grand FraternityTennessee Supreme Court · 1915
- Doggett, Bassett, Hills & Co. v. StevensSupreme Court of Kansas · 1884
- Ray v. Cox, JudgeUtah Supreme Court · 1934
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.