Case ID: kan_107/html/0422-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Dawson, J.:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 22,542.
    E. D. Woodburn, Appellee, v. Dora E. Harvey, Appellee, and B. C. Hamilton, Appellant.
    
    Appeal from Jackson district court; Thomas A. Fairchild, judge pro tem.
    
    Opinion denying a rehearing filed July 19, 1920.
    (For original opinion of affirmance see ante, p. 57, 190 Pac. 620.)
    
      J. B. Larimer, and W. Glenn Hamilton, both of Topeka, for the appellant.
    
      Lee Monroe, Guy L. Hursh, E. R. Sloan, and G. M. Monroe, all of Topeka, for the appellees.
   OPINION DENYING A REHEARING.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Dawson, J.:

It is urged that the pleadings were not broad enough to include an issue of fraud. True, but there was no such issue; it was an action on a contract, and so continued throughout the trial. Defendant could have asked that the pleadings be amended to show whether that contract was oral or written, but he chose to traverse the issue as pleaded — not ,to have the issue more specifically pleaded. While a slight intimation of fraud crept out in the evidence, that was only a minor incident in the narrative of the transaction between the parties.

Affidavits of Colorado witnesses to the contract are presented for the first time in support of this petition for a rehearing. They formed no part of the evidence upon which the trial court based its judgment. They cannot be considered now to disturb that judgment. (See Wideman v. Faivre, 100 Kan. 102, 107, 108, 163 Pac. 619.)

Rehearing denied.