TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Rettman v. Richardson

C. A. Rettman v. C. W. Richardson

Rettman v. Richardson, 17 Kan. 413 (1877)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Kansas · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 15, 1877
Judges
Valentine
Citations
17 Kan. 413
Headnotes
Questions Settled — Not to be Reopened, or Discussed. Where every legal question involved in a case has already been passed upon by the supreme court in other cases, and when the court below has committed no error for which the judgment of such court can be reversed, such judgment will be affirmed without any discussion of any of the questions involved in such case.
Summary
Error from Wilson District Cowrt. Action by Richardson, against Rettman, to recover the contract-price of a “ Marsh Harvester,” sold by plaintiff to defendant. The plaintiff had judgment at the February Term 1875, and defendant brings the case here. • •

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Valentine

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

The opinion of the court was delivered by Valentine, J.:

This was an action for damages for breach of a contract. The action was commenced by Richardson against Rettman in a justice’s court, where judgment was rendered for the plaintiff for $56.30, and costs. Rettman then appealed to the district court. In the district court the case was tried before a jury. We have all the evidence in *414 troduced on the trial; but none of the instructions given or refused have been brought to this court. The jury found a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for $34.85, for which amount, together with costs, judgment was rendered. The defendant now brings the case to this court on petition in error. There is no new question of law involved in this case. Every legal question involved therein has already been passed upon and decided by this court in other cases. And the decisions in other cases have been published in the supreme court reports, and have therefore become public. "We are also satisfied that the court below committed no error for which the judgment of such court can be reversed. It will therefore be seen that nothing could be gained by a discussion of any of the legal questions involved in this case, and therefore the judgment of the court below will be affirmed without any such discussion.

All the Justices concurring.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1879–1880: 11909–1910: 118792026peak 1879 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Lucas v. Sturr21 Kan. 480 (1879)
  2. Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. Stone101 P. 666 (Kan. 1909)

Most recent

  1. Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. Stone101 P. 666 (Kan. 1909)
  2. Lucas v. Sturr21 Kan. 480 (1879)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list