Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Kansas Volume 88

Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Kansas Volume 88

By (author) 

List price: US$22.40

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks


This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1913 edition. Excerpt: any absolute standard by which such value may be determined with definiteness and certainty, it is not error to admit evidence of the value of the article itself, to be considered with other circumstances in determining the value of its use. 2. Same. In that situation it is not error to admit evi dence of the price at which the owner subsequently sold the article. Appeal from Reno district court. Opinion filed January 11, 1913. Affirmed. Carr W. Taylor, of Topeka, and George A. N eeley, of Hutchinson, for the appellant. Prigg & Williams, of Hutchinson, for the appellee. The opinion of the court was delivered by MASON, J.: The Carey Coal Company, an individual doing business under that name, sued the Beebe Concrete Company, a copartnership, upon an account. There was no controversy over this, but a trial was had upon a cross-demand. The defendants had furnished for the use of the plaintiff a second-hand steam engine. They assert that this was done under an agreement that they were to be paid a reasonable price for its use, that it was used for 230 days, and that its use was worth $5 a day. The plaintiff contends that the agreement was that he was to have the use of the engine in consideration of repairs he made upon it, that it was not used for more than 90 days, and that its use was not worth the amount named. The jury awarded the defendants $125 on the claim, thereby in effect finding that there was an agreement to pay what the use of the engine was reasonably worth, and that it was reasonably worth that amount. The defendants appeal on the ground that the allowance was too small. The only question presented is whether prejudicial error was committed in the admission_ of certain evidence introduced as having a bearing upon more

Product details

  • Paperback
  • 189 x 246 x 19mm | 626g
  • English
  • Illustrations, black and white
  • 1236828690
  • 9781236828699