Case Name: Sam Hegarty, Appellant, v. The National Refining Company, Appellee
Court: Kansas Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Kansas
Decision Date: 1921-12-23
Citations: 110 Kan. 171
Docket Number: No. 23,741
Parties: Sam Hegarty, Appellant, v. The National Refining Company, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Kansas Reports
Volume: 110
Pages: 171–171

Head Matter:
No. 23,741.
Sam Hegarty, Appellant, v. The National Refining Company, Appellee.
Appeal from Reno district court; William G. Fairchild, judge.
Opinion filed December 23, 1921.
Motion to dismiss overruled.
F. L. Martin, John M. Martin, and James N. Farley, all of Hutchinson, for the appellant.
J. S. Simmons, and Stuart Simmons, both of Hutchinson, for the appellee.

Opinion:
Per Curiam:
The appellee files a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the appellant has not caused a transcript of the evidence to be prepared and filed. In order for the appellant to obtain a decision on any • question affected by the evidence it is necessary for him to procure a complete transcript of the oral evidence. (Readicker v. Denning, 86 Kan. 79, 119 Pac. 533; McGuire v. Davis, 95 Kan. 486, 148 Pac. 755.) Here, however, the appellant raises no question of that character — his sole contention is that judgment should have been rendered in his favor on the special findings, to determine which no reference to the evidence is necessary. The appellee, however, wishes to obtain a review of the decision of the trial court on his demurrer to the evidence and other rulings affected by the evidence. As to these matters the appellee is himself in effect the appellant and it devolves upon him to procure the transcript.
The motion to dismiss is denied.