TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Estate of McDermott v. Loftus

The Estate of Manus McDermott v. John Loftus

Estate of McDermott v. Loftus, 27 Kan. 68 (1882)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of Kansas · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 15, 1882
Citations
27 Kan. 68
Summary
Loftus filed, in the probate court of Morris county, his-demand against the estate of Manus MoDermott, deceased, for boarding, lodging and caring for decedent’s mother for nineteen years in Indiana. The probate • court refused to allow this demand, and the plaintiff appealed to the district court of that county, and at the April Term, 1880, recovered a judgment for $1,900 and costs. The 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

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

Per Curiam:

More than one year having intervened between the rendition of judgment in this case in the district *69 court and the filing of the petition in error in this court, this court is without jurisdiction to review such judgment, and the petition in error must therefore be dismissed. (Laws of 1881, ch. 126, §2.)

How later courts describe this case

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

1882–1883: 11886–1887: 11890–1891: 11916–1917: 11940–1941: 118822026peak 1882 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Dyal v. City of Topeka35 Kan. 62 (1886)
  2. Byington v. Quinton45 Kan. 188 (1891)
  3. Howard v. Arkansaw1916 OK 703, 158 P. 437
  4. Phillips v. Carson119 P.2d 488 (Kan. 1941)
  5. Waddell v. Shears28 Kan. 415 (1882)

Most recent

  1. Phillips v. Carson119 P.2d 488 (Kan. 1941)
  2. Howard v. Arkansaw1916 OK 703, 158 P. 437
  3. Byington v. Quinton45 Kan. 188 (1891)
  4. Dyal v. City of Topeka35 Kan. 62 (1886)
  5. Waddell v. Shears28 Kan. 415 (1882)

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