Legal Opinion

Rauh v. Dumler

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided March 10, 1951No. 38,178PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Wedell, J.:

This was an action to replevin an automobile. Judgment was for defendant and the plaintiffs appeal.

In order to avoid confusion we shall continue to refer to J. R. Rauh and Frank Busboom, copartners doing business under the firm name and style of Finance Credit Company, as plaintiffs, and to Donald H. Dumler as the defendant. The defendant Home State Bank filed no pleadings and is not now involved. It was stipulated there should be no trial on the cross petition of the defendant, Dumler, for damages until the issue of ownership and right to…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. DavisSupreme Court of Kansas · 1950
  2. Gump Investment Co. v. JacksonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1925
  3. Fogle v. General Credit, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1941
  4. Sims v. SuggSupreme Court of Kansas · 1948
  5. Bankers Investment Co. v. MeekerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1948

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Herl v. State Bank of ParsonsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1965
  2. Securities Acceptance Corporation v. PerkinsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1957
  3. Universal Finance Corp. v. SchmidSupreme Court of Kansas · 1955
  4. Bordman Investment Co. v. FieldSupreme Court of Kansas · 1958
  5. Home Finance Corporation v. CoxSupreme Court of Kansas · 1962

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API