Case ID: kan_102/html/0562-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Marshall, J.:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 21,224.
    August Burzio, by his next friend, Pauline Burzio, Appellee, v. The Joplin & Pittsburg Railway Company, Appellant.
    
    OPINION ON REHEARING.
    Appeal from Cherokee district court; JAMES N. Dunbar, judge.
    Opinion modifying former opinion filed March 9, 1918.
    (For original opinion of affirmance see ante, p. 287.)
    
      John P. Curran, of Pittsburg, and S. L. 'Walker, of Columbus, for the appellant.
    
      C. A. McNeill, and Maurice McNeill, both of Columbus, for the appellee.
   The opinion of the court was delivered by

Marshall, J.:

In a petition for a rehearing, the defendant challenges the correctness of a statement made in the opinion found in Burzio v. Railway Co., 102 Kan. 287. That statement is as follows: “It is urged that the findings of the jury-are contradictory to each o^her.” (p. 292.) The defendant contends that this matter was not presented. An examination of the defendant's brief discloses that the contention is correct. This matter was not urged as a ground for reversing the judgment of the trial court. The opinion that has been rendered is modified by striking out all reference to the findings of the jury being contradictory to each other. With this modification the opinion is adhered to.