Board of Railroad Commissioners v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.

Citations

• 71 Kan. 193
• 80 P. 53
• 1905 Kan. LEXIS 117

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COUET.</p> <p>1. Practice, Supreme Court — Review of Conflicting Evidence in Certain Cases. In a suit brought in the district court by a railway company against the board of railroad commissioners to vacate an order of the board establishing a railway station, a judgment in the case will not be reversed on the ground that the court below erred in deciding disputed questions of fact.</p> <p>2. --- The Statute Held Not to Change the Practice. The direction found in section 5999 of the General Statutes of 1901 that the supreme court, in cases of the kind mentioned in the above paragraph, “shall examine the record, including the evidence, and render such judgment as shall be just and proper in the premises,” does not change the established practice which has prevailed from the beginning in this court, to the effect that a judgment of the trial court will not be reversed on a question of fact if the evidence be conflicting.</p> <p>3. -Legislative Intent Deduced from Preceding Section of Statute. A legislative intent not to change the practice by requiring this court on proceedings in error to review disputed points of fact in cases brought under section 5999, supra, may be deduced from the provisions of section 5998 of the General Statutes of 1901, which authorize any person aggrieved by the disobedience of an order of the board of railroad commissioners or the attorney-general to institute a proceeding in mandamus in this court to enforce the order, in which case conflicting evidence may be considered to the same extent as if the matters involved were submitted to a jury.</p>