Hess v. Conway

Citations

• 93 Kan. 246
• 144 P. 205
• 4 A.L.R. 1587
• 1914 Kan. LEXIS 418

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Supreme Court — Distinction Between Original and Appellate Jurisdiction. The case of In re Burnette, 73 Kan. 609', 85 Pac. 575, so far as it points out the distinction between .original and appellate jurisdiction and the lack of power on the part of the legislature to confer original jurisdiction on this court, followed;</p> <p>2. Same — Section 580 of Civil Code, Relating to Further Testimony in Supreme Court, Construed. Section 580 of the civil code, providing that in all cases except those triable by jury as a matter of right, this court may, on appeal, receive further testimony and adopt such procedure as may be necessary or expedient for a full and final hearing and determination of the cause, would be unconstitutional if construed to authorize a prolongation or renewal of the trial of issues of fact in this court on appeal.</p> <p>3. Same. To save the section from unconstitutionality it must be interpreted merely as providing this court with adequate means for exercising its true appellate jurisdiction. The nature of the court’s function is not changed and the scope of its original jurisdiction is not enlarged, but the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction is facilitated by giving it command of aids to review supplemental to the strict record of the cause and sufficient to meet the exigencies of any case.</p> <p>4. Same — When Further Testimony May Be Considered by Supreme Court. Without the aid of a statute this court may, in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, avail itself of authentic evidence outside the record to prevent a miscarriage of justice, to avoid a useless circuity of proceeding, to protect its jurisdiction, to protect itself against imposition where the controversy has been settled or for other reason no longer in fact exists, and perhaps under other peculiar and extraordinary circumstances.</p> <p>5. Same — Further Testimony Not Considered! Under the Facts of This Case. In this case a trial of the is