Legal Opinion

Burdick v. Carbondale Investment Co.

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided March 11, 1905No. 13,990PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Error from Lyon district court; Dennis Madden, judge.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Clark A. Smith, J.:

This case has been in this court twice before (Investment Co. v. Burdick, 58 Kan. 517, 50 Pac. 442, and Investment Co. v. Burdick, 67 id. 329, 72 Pac. 781.) In the latter ease the cause of action was pending on a petition almost identical with the one now under consideration, with respect to the allegation of damage from the premature bringing of the former action and the allegation of damage for the breach of a written contract. This court then held that the petition stated, or attempted to state, two causes of action. (67 Kan. 333,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Leavenworth, Northern & Southern Railway Co. v. WilkinsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1891
  2. Carbondale Investment Co. v. BurdickSupreme Court of Kansas · 1903
  3. Pierce v. BicknellSupreme Court of Kansas · 1873
  4. Carbondale Investment Co. v. BurdickSupreme Court of Kansas · 1897

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Hicks v. ParkerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1936
  2. Anderson v. Denison Clay Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1919
  3. Edelblute v. Waddell & Reed, Inc.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1951
  4. Title Loan & Investment Co. v. FullerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1919
  5. Marshall v. MarshallSupreme Court of Kansas · 1949

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

Powered by the Exa API