Burnette v. Elliott

Citations

• 72 Kan. 624
• 84 P. 374
• 1906 Kan. LEXIS 368

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Petition — Indefiniteness—Demurrer—Objection to Evidence. Indefiniteness and informality in a pleading cannot be reached by a demurrer, nor by an objection to the introduction of evidence.</p> <p>2. -Presumption. Considerable latitude of presumption is allowed in sustaining a petition where issue is joined upon it, and it is only attacked at the beginning of the trial by an objection to the admission of any testimony.</p> <p>3. -Literal Interpretation. Upon such an objection the pleading should be liberally interpreted, and if upon any fair construction it can be held to state a cause of action the objection should be overruled.</p> <p>4. Attorneys — Malicious Negligence — Client’s Reputation Injured — Petition Sufficient. Under this rule of interpretation, a petition which in substance charges the defendant with acts tending to destroy the character and reputation of the plaintiff, a person who was mentally weak and unable to take care of himself, and that while plaintiff was in such condition and under charges of professional misconduct the defendant was employed to defend and protect him in a disbarment proceeding, but that the defendant filed no answer and made no defense, in consequence of which a judgment by default was taken against the plaintiff, and which avers that the omission and neglect were malicious and intended to accomplish a selfish and unlawful purpose of the defendant, and to discredit and injure the plaintiff, states a cause of action.</p>