The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-11-13
LEGAL.
No. 1880.
The State of Kansas
N. Allen Hansford.
Appeal from Shawnee Count

Allen Hansford
Appeal from Shawnee County
AFFIRMED.
syllabus. By the Court Johnston. c. J.
l. Where, after jury called in a Grim
troduced. the court learns and determine
from an inquiry tudicially conducted that
juror Is prejudiced and unfit to sit in
such as would vitiate verdict the Jury
may be discharged and another jury i'm
ant will not be deemed to have been there
oy twice put in jeopardy for the same
2. The discovery and disclosure by the
juror, after the trial was begun, that he
entertained a prejudice growing out of
family, revived IN his mind by the testi-
mony given in the case, and which unfit
thing too which was not known and could
not have been foreseen by the court, the
parties. or the counsel. is an accident
in Section Isl of the Civil Code and justi-
fed the court in discharging the jury from
rendering a verdict.
All the Justices concurring.
Attest: d. A. VALENTINE,
lSeaL1 Clerk Supreme Court.
No. 1851.
T. w. Silven
The Board of County Commissioners OF
Usage County.
Error from Usage County.
AFFIRMED.
SYLLABUS sr3 BY the Court. Johnston. C. J.
poses OF taxation is not judicial func-
ton and Chapter of the Laws of 1905.
board Of equaiization s to the s sT ee count
is unconstitutional and void.
All the Justices concurring.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE.
LSeal1 Clerk Supreme Court.
GALLEY 8 cvere-z.oae
The City of Kansas City. Kansas. ct al
Martin Napiecek. ct al.
Error from Wyandotte County.
REVERSED
syllabus. By the Court. Mason, j.
ment is made against the property within
benefit district to pay for a part of the
void by the fact that the report of the ap-
pra1sers appointed to assess the damages
oeeasioped by the taking of the land re-
award was based upon the theory that the
owner should retain the buildings situated
thereon, and remove them at his own ex-
2. The language of a notice given by
to uphold their acts, especially in the case
of ambiguous phrases borrowed from the
g. In the course of proceedings instituted
by city for opening street and charg-
ing a part of the cost to the property
within a benefit district it is unnecessary
that the description of the property refer
red to therein should include statement
of the city, county or state in which 1t is
situated The subdivisions referred to
must be understood to be those of the
municipality concerned.
4. A statute providing that appraisers
shall assess part of the cost of such i'm
proyement against the property within
specified district which shall in their opin-
ion be especially benefited thereby, in
the absence of provision for any other
rule of apportionment must be construed
to mean that the total amount to be
charged against such property shall be
distributed in proportion to the actual
benefit received by the several tracts re-
spectively, as estimated by the appraisers.
5. Under the statute (sec. 100. ch. 122,
laws of 1909 authorizing part of the cost
of opening a street to be charged to prop
erty especially benefited thereby assess
ments may be made against tracts not
fronting thereon.
All the Justices concurring-
A true copy. ..-. ,--
Attest: Sd A VALENTINE,
tSeaLl HiClerk Supreme Court.