Missouri Can Co. v. Ross
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from Wyandotte court of common pleas; William G. Holt, judge.
1Per curiam
In this case the principal contentions are that a demurrer to plaintiff’s evidence should have been sustained, and that the court should have directed a verdict for the defendant. In arguing these propositions the defendant does not do what the law requires, viz., take into consideration only those facts and those inferences of fact which are favorable to the plaintiff. On the other hand, its own evidence is frequently brought forward and urged as breaking down the plaintiff’s case, and in every instance in which the plaintiff’s testimony is susceptible of an adverse interpretation it is…
2Cited by8 opinions
- James v. GrigsbySupreme Court of Kansas · 1923
- Meneley v. MontgomerySupreme Court of Kansas · 1937
- Rowan v. RosenthalSupreme Court of Kansas · 1923
- Lyon v. LyonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- State ex rel. McGill v. GerhardsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1917
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.