Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. Bagley

Citations

• 65 Kan. 188
• 69 P. 189
• 1902 Kan. LEXIS 37

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THB COURT.</p> <p>1. Practice, Supreme Court — Might to a Meview — Muling on Mlea of Another Action Mending. The plaintiff brought two suits upon a single cause of action, in the first of which he recovered a j udgment against the defendant. In the second suit defendant set up, by way of answer, that a former suit upon the same cause of action had been prosecuted to j udgment, which was a final adjudication, and that the causes of action were merged therein. The court sustained the defense, and held that the proceedings in the first case were a bar to the maintenance of the second. Sold, that the pleading of the former proceedings, including the judgment, although a recognition of the existence of the judgment, did not take away from the defendant the right to a review of such proceedings and judgment.</p> <p>2. Limitation or Action — Original Petition and Amendment— New Cause of Action. Where the original petition states no cause of action whatever, it will not arrest the running of the statute of limitations, and an amendment made after the bar of the statute is complete must be treated as filed at the time the amendment is made. A cause of action, being stated then for the first time, cannot escape the bar of the statute of limitations, by being filed as an amendment.</p>