Kaiser v. State
Citations
- 80 Kan. 364
- 102 P. 454
- 1909 Kan. LEXIS 74
Syllabus
<p>SYLLABUS BY THE' COURT.</p> <p>1. Insane Persons - — • Liability of Estates for Cost of Maintenance at State Hospital — Constitutional Provision. The provision of the constitution (art. 7, § 1) that “institutions for-the benefit of the insane, blind, and deaf and dumb, and such other benevolent institutions as the public good may require,, shall be fostered and supported by.the state, subject to such regulations as may be prescribed by law,” does not prevent legislation making the estates of persons committed to the-state hospital for the insane liable for the cost of their maintenance there.</p> <p>2. Constitutional Law — Uniform and. Equal Taxation. Nor is. such legislation in conflict with the constitutional provision requiring uniformity and equality in the rate of taxation.</p> <p>3. Insane Persons — Liability of Estates for Maintenance at-State Hospital. Under the provision of the statute in relation to the state hospital for the insane (Gen. Stat. 1889, §3726; Gen. Stat. 1901, § 3988) that if the probate court shall find; that a person adjudged to be insane has sufficient means for-his maintenance and that of his family, without impoverishment, it shall order his guardian to pay for his maintenance-out of his estate, the state may upon the death, of a patient in such hospital recover from his administrator the cost of his maintenance for any period during which he was possessed of' means not needed for the support of any one dependent upon him.</p> <p>4. - Same. The rule stated in the foregoing paragraph is. not altered by the fact that the form of commitment prescribed in that statute, directing the patient to be received and maintained at the expense of the county or the guardian,. was changed in a revision (Laws 1901, ch. 353, § 60) to read' “at the expense of the state.”</p> <p>5. Judgments — Bes Judicata. The fact that the probate court found that a person adjudged insane was without sufficient. means for his support, and ordered that his maintenance-
Judges: Mason
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
12 cases in this archive cite this case.
- In Re Raseman EstateMichigan Court of Appeals· 1969-08-29· cited 14×
- State v. BatemanSupreme Court of Kansas· 1922-02-11· cited 14×
- Directors of Insane Asylum v. BoydNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1932-08-23· cited 11×
- State v. Alexander Ikey's EstateSupreme Court of Vermont· 1911-05-05· cited 10×
- State v. KosiorekConnecticut Appellate Court· 1969-03-28· cited 8×
- State v. MooreSupreme Court of Kansas· 1913-11-08· cited 8×
- State ex rel. Hilton v. Probate Court of County of FreebornSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1919-04-25· cited 5×
- Department of Treasury v. RasemanMichigan Court of Appeals· 1969-06-25· cited 3×
- Richards v. RichardsSupreme Court of Kansas· 1972-05-06· cited 1×
- State v. ByrneMontana Supreme Court· 1960-03-11· cited 1×
- State v. WillisWashington Supreme Court· 1941-10-20
- United States v. GartnerD. Alaska· 1945-10-31
Cites
7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- McNairy County v. McCoinTennessee Supreme Court· 1898-05-07· cited 13×
- Baldwin v. Douglas CountyNebraska Supreme Court· 1893-06-29· cited 12×
- Montgomery County v. GuptonSupreme Court of Missouri· 1897-05-25· cited 10×
- State ex rel. Attorney General v. County CommissionersNebraska Supreme Court· 1886-01-15· cited 9×
- Board of Commissioners v. RistineIndiana Supreme Court· 1890-06-05· cited 7×
- Dandurand v. County of KankakeeAppellate Court of Illinois· 1901-07-12· cited 4×
- Palmer v. Hudson River State HospitalCourt of Appeals of Kansas· 1900-07-18· cited 3×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.