Roper v. Ferris
Citation | 29 P. 1146,48 Kan. 583 |
Parties | CHARLES ROPER et al. v. MARY C. FERRIS |
Decision Date | 01 January 1892 |
Court | United States State Supreme Court of Kansas |
Error from Washington District Court.
THE opinion states the case.
Judgment affirmed.
Joseph G. Lowe, for plaintiffs in error.
Omar Powell, for defendant in error.
OPINION
The plaintiffs in error in this case ask a reversal of the judgment of the district court of Washington county, upon seven assignments of error, all of which, as is alleged, occurred during the trial; but the overruling of the motion for a new trial is not assigned as error. This is necessary to have such assignments of error considered in this court. ( Landauer v. Hoagland, 41 Kan. 520, 21 P. 645; Clark v. Schnur, 40 id. 72; Carson v. Funk, 27 id. 524.)
The judgment of the district court should be affirmed.
By the Court: It is so ordered.
All the Justices concurring.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Gale v. Fruehauf Trailer Co.
... ... judgment since the overruling of plaintiff's motion for a ... new trial has not been assigned as error. Roper v ... Ferris, 48 Kan. 583, 29 P. 1146; Gas Co. v ... Dooley, 73 Kan. 758, 84 P. 719; Brewer v ... Harris, 147 Kan. 197, 75 P.2d 287; Heniff v ... ...
-
McIntyre v. Dickinson
...the rule--harsh as it may be--and the court is firmly committed to it. See a long line of cases dealing with the point. Roper v. Ferris, 48 Kan. 583, 29 P. 1146; Gas Co. v. Dooley, 73 Kan. 758, 84 P. 719; Brewer v. Harris, 147 Kan. 197, 75 P.2d 287; and Heniff v. Clausen, 154 Kan. 717, 121 ......
- McKey v. Lauflin