Lott v. Kansas City, Fort Scott & Gulf Railroad
Mary E. Lott v. The Kansas City, Fort Scott & Gulf Railroad Company
Headnotes
Summary
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.
Opinion by Clogston, C.:
Two errors are presented — first, sustaining a demurrer to the plaintiff’s third cause of action alleged in her petition; and, second, sustaining a demurrer to the plaintiff’s evidence at the trial. Both of these questions must be decided in favor of the defendant. First, plaintiff saved no exception to the overruling of the demurrer; therefore the ruling on the demurrer to the plaintiff’s third cause of action cannot be reviewed. Before a ruling on a demurrer can be reviewed in this court, exceptions must be saved in the court below.
As to the second error assigned, the record shows that there was no motion made by the plaintiff for a new trial. Before this court can review a demurrer to the testimony, or other errors occurring at the trial, a motion for a new trial must be made. None having been made in this case, no review can be had. (Gruble v. Ryus, 23 Kas. 195 ; Norris v. Evans, 39 id. 668.)
It is therefore recommended that the judgment of the court below be affirmed.
By the Court: It is so ordered.
All the Justices concurring.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 7 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.