Enlow v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that one attacking evidentiary rulings must show an abuse of discretion
• refusing to address issue where appellant failed to specify error or cite legal authority supporting argument in brief
• court did not address appellant’s argument because appellant failed to specify the error in the jury instructions
• argument that evidence was improperly excluded will not be considered for the first time on appeal where no proffer was made pursuant to K.S.A. 60-405
• reference to transcript, instructions without specifying error or citing legal authority violates Supreme Court Rule 6.02[a][5] [2024 Kan. S. Ct. R. at 36]; prevents review of merits
• “Enlow does not specify the error or cite legal authority supporting her contention.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).