adheres rule in Kansas

2012In Sams , we “conceded [that] the [preservation] rule does not apply to an instruction which is in itself erroneous and an appellant is not estopped from complaining of it as error by not having objected to it at the time it was given.” Sams, 157 Kan. at 288 ; see also Collett, 194 Kan. at 79 (“This court adheres to the rule that where the instructions or directions of the trial court are in themselves erroneous, an appellant is not estopped of complaining of them as error by not having objected at the time they were given.”); Richardson v. Business Mens Protective Ass’n., 129 Kan. 700 , Syl.

2012In Sams , we “conceded [that] the [preservation] rule does not apply to an instruction which is in itself erroneous and an appellant is not estopped from complaining of it as error by not having objected to it at the time it was given.” Sams, 157 Kan. at 288 ; see also Collett, 194 Kan. at 79 (“This court adheres to the rule that where the instructions or directions of the trial court are in themselves erroneous, an appellant is not estopped of complaining of them as error by not having objected at the time they were given.”); Richardson v. Business Mens Protective Ass’n., 129 Kan. 700 , Syl.

2012In Sams , we “conceded [that] the [preservation] rule does not apply to an instruction which is in itself erroneous and an appellant is not estopped from complaining of it as error by not having objected to it at the time it was given.” Sams, 157 Kan. at 288 ; see also Collett, 194 Kan. at 79 (“This court adheres to the rule that where the instructions or directions of the trial court are in themselves erroneous, an appellant is not estopped of complaining of them as error by not having objected at the time they were given.”); Richardson v. Business Mens Protective Ass’n., 129 Kan. 700 , Syl.

1997Because this court adheres to the rule that the erroneous admission of evidence may not be raised on appeal absent a timely and specific objection at trial, see, e.g., State v. Sutton, 256 Kan. 913 , Syl. 4, that part of appellant’s argument which is based on Frye is not properly before this court.

1981This rule relative to mootness was well stated in Moyer v. Board of County Commissioners, 197 Kan. 23, 25 , 415 P.2d 261 (1966), as follows: “This court adheres to the rule that it will not consider and decide questions which if decided would not be applicable to any actual controversy and where the judgment itself would be unavailing.

1981This rule relative to mootness was well stated in Moyer v. Board of County Commissioners, 197 Kan. 23, 25 , 415 P.2d 261 (1966), as follows: “This court adheres to the rule that it will not consider and decide questions which if decided would not be applicable to any actual controversy and where the judgment itself would be unavailing.

1981However, appeals will not be dismissed as moot unless it clearly and convincingly appears the actual controversy has ceased and the only judgment which could be entered would be ineffectual for any purpose and an idle act insofar as rights involved in the action are concerned.” See also Hannon v. Maynard, 3 Kan.

1969(In re Estate of Lloyd, 178 Kan. 572, 576 , 290 P. 2d 817 ; Applegate v. Home Oil Co., 182 Kan. 655, 661 , 324 P. 2d 203 .) The consideration of a few general principles applicable to appellate review should dispose of this controversy.

1969(In re Estate of Lloyd, 178 Kan. 572, 576 , 290 P. 2d 817 ; Applegate v. Home Oil Co., 182 Kan. 655, 661 , 324 P. 2d 203 .) The consideration of a few general principles applicable to appellate review should dispose of this controversy.

1969(In re Estate of Lloyd, 178 Kan. 572, 576 , 290 P. 2d 817 ; Applegate v. Home Oil Co., 182 Kan. 655, 661 , 324 P. 2d 203 .) The consideration of a few general principles applicable to appellate review should dispose of this controversy.

1969(In re Estate of Lloyd, 178 Kan. 572, 576 , 290 P. 2d 817 ; Applegate v. Home Oil Co., 182 Kan. 655, 661 , 324 P. 2d 203 .) The consideration of a few general principles applicable to appellate review should dispose of this controversy.

1966However, appeals will not be dismissed as moot unless it clearly and convincingly appears the actual controversy has ceased and the only judgment which could be entered would be ineffectual for any purpose and an idle act insofar as rights involved in the action are concerned. ( Moore v. Smith, 160 Kan. 167 , 160 P.2d 675 and cases cited therein.) As will be demonstrated by the conclusion of this opinion effectual relief can be granted if the judgment should be reversed.

1966However, appeals will not be dismissed as moot unless it clearly and convincingly appears the actual controversy has ceased and the only judgment which could be entered would be ineffectual for any purpose and an idle act insofar as rights involved in the action are concerned. ( Moore v. Smith, 160 Kan. 167 , 160 P.2d 675 and cases cited therein.) As will be demonstrated by the conclusion of this opinion effectual relief can be granted if the judgment should be reversed.

1964In Miller v. Kruggel, 165 Kan. 435 , 195 P. 2d 597 , we state at page 439 of the opinion: “Objection was not made to this instruction at the time it was given but the alleged error in giving the instruction was urged upon the motion for a new trial.

1964In Miller v. Kruggel, 165 Kan. 435 , 195 P. 2d 597 , we state at page 439 of the opinion: “Objection was not made to this instruction at the time it was given but the alleged error in giving the instruction was urged upon the motion for a new trial.

1960(See, State, ex rel., v. School Board, 110 Kan. 779 [Syl. ¶5], 204 Pac. 742 ; and Hultz v. Taylor, 163 Kan. 180, 185 , 181 P. 2d 515 .) It is fully recognized, however, this is not the situation confronting the court.

1960(See, State, ex rel., v. School Board, 110 Kan. 779 [Syl. ¶5], 204 Pac. 742 ; and Hultz v. Taylor, 163 Kan. 180, 185 , 181 P. 2d 515 .) It is fully recognized, however, this is not the situation confronting the court.

1960(See, State, ex rel., v. School Board, 110 Kan. 779 [Syl. ¶5], 204 Pac. 742 ; and Hultz v. Taylor, 163 Kan. 180, 185 , 181 P. 2d 515 .) It is fully recognized, however, this is not the situation confronting the court.

1960(See, State, ex rel., v. School Board, 110 Kan. 779 [Syl. ¶5], 204 Pac. 742 ; and Hultz v. Taylor, 163 Kan. 180, 185 , 181 P. 2d 515 .) It is fully recognized, however, this is not the situation confronting the court.

1935(Berry v. Shell Petroleum Co., 140 Kan. 94 , 33 P. 2d 953 .) It is not necessary to trace the history of that celebrated case in England and in the United States.

1935(Berry v. Shell Petroleum Co., 140 Kan. 94 , 33 P. 2d 953 .) It is not necessary to trace the history of that celebrated case in England and in the United States.