Allen v. State
| Decision Date | 15 December 1897 |
| Docket Number | 146 |
| Citation | 51 P. 572,6 Kan.App. 915 |
| Parties | A. S. ALLEN et al. v. THE STATE OF KANSAS |
| Court | Kansas Court of Appeals |
December 15, 1897.
Error from Barton District Court. Hon. Ansel R. Clark, Judge. Affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Elrick C. Cole, for plaintiff in error.
E. L Hotchkiss, for defendant in error.
This action was commenced in the District Court of Barton County Kansas, by the State of Kansas, to recover from the plaintiffs in error and one D. R. Jones the amount due by reason of the wrongful conduct of said D. R. Jones while county clerk of said Barton County. The plaintiffs in error were sureties upon the official bond of said Jones.
The petition alleges that the county commissioners of Barton County, Kansas, made orders that the said D. R. Jones, as county clerk, draw orders or scrip on the county treasurer of Barton County for the amounts allowed by them to certain persons; that in drawing said scrip and before parting with the same, and disregarding the order of said board of county commissioners, and disregarding his duties as county clerk of said county, he falsely made, altered and counterfeited the said scrip aforesaid, and that by said falsely making and falsely altering said scrip, and causing the same to be done he made the same read for $ 43.60 instead of $ 3.60, as the said scrip was originally ordered to be drawn by said board; and that the said D. R. Jones presented said scrip to the county treasurer of Barton County and received payment therefor, etc.
The petition also alleges that, by reason of the said D. R. Jones falsely making, altering and drawing up said scrip or warrant, there is due from each and all of the said defendants the sum of forty dollars; and for the further reason that, by the unlawful acts of the said D. R. Jones in drawing, falsely making, and receiving the payment upon, said falsely made and altered warrant, the conditions of said bond have become absolute, and the sureties thereon, and all of said defendants herein, have become liable to the plaintiff in the sum of forty dollars and interest thereon as aforesaid.
Each count in the petition contains practically the same allegations, differing in amounts to cover the facts of each warrant. The petition also alleges that the facts relating to the conduct of Jones were not discovered until November, 1893.
At the conclusion of the evidence of the defendant in error, the plaintiffs in error interposed a demurrer thereto, which was by the court overruled.
The plaintiffs in error offered no evidence, judgment was rendered against...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
MacLeod v. Stelle
...Lake Shore etc. Ry. Co., 120 U.S. 130, 7 S.Ct. 430; 30 L.Ed. 569; San Pedro Lbr. Co. v. Reynolds, 121 Cal. 74, 53 P. 410; Allen v. State, 6 Kan. App. 915, 51 P. 572; Christensen v. Jessen, 5 Cal. Unrep. 45, 40 P. Lewey v. Fricke Coke Co., 166 Pa. 536, 45 Am. St. 684, 31 A. 261, 28 L. R. A. ......
-
Canyon County ex rel. Griffiths v. Moore
...Waugh v. Guthrie Gas etc. Co., 37 Okla. 239, 131 P. 174, L. R. A. 1917B, 1253; Johnson v. Beattie, 88 Vt. 512, 93 A. 250; Allen v. State, 6 Kan. App. 915, 51 P. 572; Skagit County v. American Bonding Co., 59 Wash. 109 P. 197. Norton v. Title Guaranty & Surety Co., 176 Cal. 212, 168 P. 16, i......
-
Griffith v. State
...Gas, etc., Co., 37 Okl. 239, 131 P. 174, L.R.A. 1917B 1253; Johnson v. Beattie, 88 Vt. 512, 93 A. 250 (L.R.A. 1915D 1163); Allen v. State, 6 Kan. App. 915, 51 P. 572; Skagit County v. American Bonding Co., Wash. 1, 109 P. 197; Norton v. Title Guaranty & Surety Co., 176 Cal. 212, 168 P. 16, ......
-
State v. McKay
... ... by the person liable." ... See, ... also, Regier v. Ameranda Petroleum Corp., 139 Kan ... 177, 181-183, 30 P.2d 136, where many of the cases above ... cited are reviewed and followed ... Appellant ... cites and relies largely on Allen v. State, 6 Kan ... App. 915, 51 P. 572, and McMullen v. Loan ... Association, 64 Kan. 298, 67 P. 892, 56 L.R.A. 924, 91 ... Am.St.Rep. 236. These cases may readily be distinguished from ... the one before us. In the Allen Case it is quite clear from ... the opinion that all the legal ... ...