In re Justus B. Linderholm (Mrs. Agnes Ekblad v. Linderholm

• Citation: 165 P. 830,101 Kan. 18
• Decision Date: 09 June 1917
• Docket Number: 20,523
• Parties: In re JUSTUS B. LINDERHOLM v. JUSTUS B. LINDERHOLM, Appellant MRS. AGNES EKBLAD, Appellee,
• Court: Kansas Supreme Court

165 P. 830

101 Kan. 18

In re JUSTUS B. LINDERHOLM

MRS. AGNES EKBLAD, Appellee, v. JUSTUS B. LINDERHOLM, Appellant

No. 20,523

Supreme Court of Kansas

June 9, 1917

Decided January, 1917.

Proceeding in mandamus in an appeal from McPherson district court; ROSWELL L. KING, judge pro tem.

Writ denied.

SYLLABUS

SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.

MANDAMUS--Correction of Journal Entry. Where, after a dispute between counsel as to what a journal entry of judgment on a motion and demurrer should contain, the trial judge signs a journal entry reciting the judgment of the court, a writ of mandamus will not issue to compel the correction of the journal entry so as to make it recite the evidence or other showing on which the judgment was based.

Justus B. Linderholm, of Topeka, pro se.

Frank O. Johnson, of McPherson, for the appellee.

OPINION

MARSHALL, J.:

Justus B. Linderholm asks that a writ of mandamus be issued to compel Judge R. L. King to correct the journal entry of proceedings had before him in McPherson county. The journal entry, which is the subject of this controversy, is as follows:

"And now, to wit on this 21st day of December, 1915, being an adjourned day of the regular December term of the said court. The Honorable R. L. King, Judge of the Eighth Judicial District of the State of Kansas, who had been called in by Judge F. F. Prigg to try this case, and the said Judge R. L. King, is sitting in this case with the consent of all parties concerned. The appellant appearing by John F. Hanson, his attorney, and the appellee by Frank O. Johnson.

"And thereupon came on to be heard the motion of the appellee to dismiss the appeal from the Probate Court of this County for the reason that no bond had been given as required by the statute, which motion was overruled by the Court and duly excepted to by the appellant.

"And thereupon came on to be heard the motion of the appellant for an order requiring the Probate Court to cancel the letters of guardianship issued by the Probate Court of said County and state to Frank O. Johnson, which motion was by the court overruled and duly excepted to by the appellant.

"And thereupon came on to be heard the demurrer of the appellant to the petition for letters of guardianship filed by Agnes Ekblad, in the Probate Court of McPherson County, Kansas, which demurrer was duly overruled by the Court and duly excepted to by the appellant.

"The appellant was granted a stay of thirty days."

Linderholm alleges:

"That said appellant's Counsel submitted a form of journal entry of rulings on said matters, but the same was not signed by the said Judge, but on the contrary a form prepared by the opposing counsel was signed, the same not having been submitted to appellant's counsel, and no opportunity being given appellant or his counsel to be heard in the matter as provided by Rule No. 4 of said court."

Linderholm further alleges...