Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 1883–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Kansas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In re A.M.M.-H.
green
1 sentence2019Lastly, in In re A.M.M.-H. , 300 Kan. 532 , 540, 331 P.3d 775 (2014), our Supreme *847 Court found that the district judge retains discretion to determine whether a particular violation warrants revocation of the stayed adult sentence if the juvenile has not yet requested a hearing on the allegations of the violation. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Griffin
neutral
2 sentences1981In State v. Griffin, 3 Kan. 1981In State v. Griffin, 3 Kan. | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Rice v. Rice
neutral
2 sentences1949We held this was error and said: “It may be conceded that some of the allegations in this defense are of matters conflicting with the terms of the written contract; but still we think it is distinctly averred that there was a cotemporaneous contract for work, a contract separate and independent from the contract evidenced by the note, and in no respects contradictory and conflicting with its terms.” Rice v. Rice, 101 Kan. 20 , 165 Pac. 799 , was an action on a note and to foreclose a mortgage. 1949We held this was error and said: “It may be conceded that some of the allegations in this defense are of matters conflicting with the terms of the written contract; but still we think it is distinctly averred that there was a cotemporaneous contract for work, a contract separate and independent from the contract evidenced by the note, and in no respects contradictory and conflicting with its terms.” Rice v. Rice, 101 Kan. 20 , 165 Pac. 799 , was an action on a note and to foreclose a mortgage. | 1 | 1949–1949 |
State v. Wilson
neutral
2 sentences1902(The State v. Wilson, 61 Kan. 791 , 60 Pac. 1054 .) The other allegations of error presented are without substantial merit, and this is especially true of the claim that the cross-examination of the doctor was unduly restricted by the court. 1902(The State v. Wilson, 61 Kan. 791 , 60 Pac. 1054 .) The other allegations of error presented are without substantial merit, and this is especially true of the claim that the cross-examination of the doctor was unduly restricted by the court. | 1 | 1902–1902 |
Overman v. Hathaway
green
1 sentence1887(See Overman v. Hathaway, 29 Kas. 434 ; Newkirk v. Marshall, 35 id. 77; Harkness v. Burton, 39 Iowa, 101 .) We have examined the other questions presented, but the allegations of error stated are not sufficient to reverse or modify the judgment. | 1 | 1887–1887 |
Harkness v. Burton
neutral
1 sentence1887(See Overman v. Hathaway, 29 Kas. 434 ; Newkirk v. Marshall, 35 id. 77; Harkness v. Burton, 39 Iowa, 101 .) We have examined the other questions presented, but the allegations of error stated are not sufficient to reverse or modify the judgment. | 1 | 1887–1887 |
Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. Kellogg
neutral
1 sentence1883Co. v. Kellogg, supra.) "We have purposely omitted to comment upon many of the allegations of error, for the reason that while the record- in this case consists of 128 pages of manuscript, the briefs do not refer to any of the pages of the record which counsel ask us to examine, and because prior to another trial the plaintiff in error will undoubtedly apply for and obtain leave to file his amended and supplemental answer, tendered during the trial, and which sets forth with great particularity the title alleged to be possessed by him, and also copies of deeds, records and other papers upon wh | 1 | 1883–1883 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.