Board of Commissioners v. Arnold
Supreme Court of Kansas
W. W. Arnold and about 75 other land-owners commenced this action to enjoin special taxes charged upon their respective lands for the improvement of the Southwest boulevard, a street in the city of Rosedale, under the authority of chapter 214, Laws of 1887. (Gen. Stat. of 1889, ¶¶ 5521-5531.) The case was tried in the court of common pleas of Wyandotte county, and by request of the parties the conclusions of fact found were stated separately from the conclusions of law.
Read the full summary
W. W. Arnold and about 75 other land-owners commenced this action to enjoin special taxes charged upon their respective lands for the improvement of the Southwest boulevard, a street in the city of Rosedale, under the authority of chapter 214, Laws of 1887. (Gen. Stat. of 1889, ¶¶ 5521-5531.) The case was tried in the court of common pleas of Wyandotte county, and by request of the parties the conclusions of fact found were stated separately from the conclusions of law. As conclusions of fact the court found: “1. That prior to the incorporation of the town of Rose-dale, a county road known as…
1Opinion of the Court
*289The opinion of the court was delivered by
Horton, C. J.:
A preliminary question is presented. It is urged that the record is not sufficient to present any question for review. Upon the trial, both parties requested that conclusions of fact be found and stated in writing separately from the conclusions of law. This was done. No exceptions were taken to the findings of fact or conclusions of law. The defendants below, however, filed a motion for a new trial, alleging, among other things, that the decision of the trial court was contrary to law.
“Where the special findings.of fact in a jury trial…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Kœhler v. BallSupreme Court of Kansas · 1863
- Stewart v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1891
- I. Weil & Co. v. EckardSupreme Court of Kansas · 1887
- Barker v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1891
3Cited by5 opinions
- Stanard v. Sampson Et Ux.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
- Tacha v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1916
- Papoose Oil Co. v. SwindlerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
- St. Louis Carbonating & Mfg. Co. v. Lookeba State BankSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Wichita Acetylene Manufacturing Co. v. HaughtonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1916