54 Kan. 155 | Kan. | 1894
The opinion of the court was delivered by
I. It is insisted that the trial court erred in not striking out the testimony of Frank C. Parkhurst, and in overruling the objections to the testimony of George Parkhurst relative to the ownership of the property described in the petition, on the ground that it was at variance with the
II. It is next insisted that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury, “That the burden of proof was upon the plaintiffs below to establish the facts alleged in their petition
It is not urged in any of the briefs that the special findings are contrary to the evidence. It appears from examination that they support the judgment rendered under the allegations of the petition.
The foregoing are the only errors referred to in the brief of the bank, although they are again discussed in the brief as third and fourth errors. The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.