The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-06-08

the CONSTITUTIONAL amendment WHICH
gave the courts instead Of the legisla-
ture the right to decide what consti-
tuteS special act. /
The Chanute people wanted a city |
court because they are located at some |
distance from the county seat, where I!
the district court does business. There |
is a lot of legal business at Chanute. |
and the lawyers and ntigants fixed up
the special act to create the court, and
give it jurisdiction over all controver-
sizes involving less than $1,000.
The supreme court holds that 1t
would be not only unconstitutional to
pass special act of this kind, but finds
that the creation Of such city courts
ial system, and tends to "incongruities
and evils"
The supreme court says that a gen.
eral law can be made applicable to
such cases as that of Chanute: Inc
trouble is that not all cities in the
Chanute class want city courts, and
will fight the enactment of such laws.
The fight of the city of Erie to force
the Erie Gas & Mineral company,
which supplies the town with gas, to
make an accounting of it's profits I'M
der a contract with the city, the city
was successful, and the decision OF the
lower court was reversed.
The city put up some money toward
prospecting for gas, and the company
took over the city's wells, and agreed
to nav the CITY one-fifth of the net
profits. The company claimed that De-
should be allowed to deduce all the ex-
pense of creating the property The
lower court decided this was vahd
contention, but the supreme court re-
verses the decision and orders new
trial.
The FIGHT for a fortune of 100000
which William Hull has been making
against Louisa T. Hull, wife or henry
| Hull, came to an end In the supreme
| court when the court affirmed the de-
cision of the Shawnee county district
| court and gave the fortune to Mrs.
| Hull. who is now Mrs. George P.
Moorehouse.
| Henry Hull, and the case hinged on a
written agreement which William Hull
produced claiming that 1t had been
given to him by Henry Hull about 20
years ago. That agreement state .i
property with William Hull. provided
f. William would not contest his will.
| The supreme court holds that TINS
agreement was in the nature of a
promissory note, and is barred by the
statute of limitations.
Another Shawnee county case of
considerable interest is that of James
| H. Boice against r. G. Shepard. Chas.
E. Shepard had $1,000 policy of in
surance in the Knights and Ladies of
Security, drawn in favor of his wife.
| His wife died, and no change was
| made in the beneficiary. When Shep-
ard died, Boice was appointed admin
| istrator, and attempted to collect the
insurance. Shepard's father put in a
claim for the money, and the knights
and Ladies of Security paid the money
into court, and let the two claimants
fight for it. The lower court decided
f0y ord he
sustains the decision.
Another special act of the legisla-
ture was knocked out in the case of
the State VS.. Henry H. Nelson ct al
from Sumner county. Nelson was one
of the members of the school board of
school district which it was sought
to dissolve by special act of the 1907
legislature. The members of the
school board refused to surrender their
offices, and the supreme court reverses
the decision of the lower court and
says the school board has the right to
continue in office.
List of Opinions.
The following are the opinions
handed down by the supreme court: |
BY JOHNSON, c. J..
Union Pacific Rid. Co, VS.. Charles |
w. Sweet; error from Trego county.
reversed and remanded with direc- |
lions TO enter judgment LOT OeIeHOdIlt- |
James H. Boice VS.. r. c. Shepard, ct
al; error from Shawnee county, |
affirmed. Walter Bovaird VS.. Ella K. |
Bovaird; error from Montgomery .
county. Affirmed. Lille M. johnson, |
ct al VS.. The McClain Investment Co.; |
error from Barton county. Reversed |
and remanded for new trial.
By BURCH. ].
State of Kansas VS.. City of Con- |
cordia; error from Cloud county. |
Reversed and remanded for new
trial. |
w. A. Randolph ct al Vs. Lydia A.
WiIhite; error from Lyon county. |
Affirmed. Graves, J. not sitting.
BY MASON. J.
The city of Osawatomie etc. vs.. |
board of county commissioners of
Miami county. ct al; error from
Miami county. \ Reversed and re-
manded with directions to overdue |
the demurrer to the amended petition.
A. NJ. Horner vs.. Theodore
Schinstock; error from Kingman
county On rehearing; reafdrmed; |
petition for rehearing denied.
H. F. Bashford VS.. L. D. Wells; |
error from Norton county. Reversed
and remanded for further proceed |
ings.
The city of Atchison VS.. J. R.
Rackliffe, ct al ETC.; error from
Atchison county. Reversed and re-
manded for further proceedings.
J. O. Benton VS.. Mrs. Mary Benton;
error from Shawnee county Re-
versed and remanded for further pro-
ceedings
BY SMITH, J.
G. n. Hartwell VS. Theo. o. Love- |
land. ct al; error from Cloud county.
Reversed and remanded for new
trial
Henry Sauter VS.. the A. T.. &. S. F.
Ry. Co.; error from Sedgwick county. |
Affirmed.
I.ardner Howell VS.. M. E. Gruver; |
error from Rawlins county. Affirmed.
BY PORTER. ].