The estimate was…. From Business: North American Dismantling is a leading nationwide demolition contractor specializing in heavy industrial demolition, commercial building strip outs, specialty….
We've been "The…. From Business: Contact our licensed and insured team at Stebbins Roofing today for friendly, prompt, and professional service.
We have been in business since Our family…. From Business: Wray Roofing offers a range of commercial, industrial and residential roof systems. It is one of the leading roofing contractors in south-central Kansas and has…. From Business: The condition of your roof has a direct impact on your quality of life and the overall value of your home.
Unfortunately, roofs don't last forever. If a leaky or…. Trey at Pave the Way was extremely helpful when our church parking lot needed to be resurfaced. They were out within two days to do the estimate…. Advertise with Us. Website Directions Services More Info. Calvin Opp Concrete, Inc. Paving Construction Inc. Our surgically sharp edges will provide a longer drill life.
To meet the needs of consumers request, we has extensive background and resources to engineer your tooling from concept or sketch to an actual piece part print For the most demanding customers and the best of all to give the customer the fast service and quality products, we are challenged to create and designed many complex tools for the seemingly impossible features for each day.
Call us today at or send a request for Quote. The appellant's notice of appeal covers the findings of fact and conclusions of law made and entered on May 10, It also includes the trial court's action in overruling its motion for a new trial.
Three of appellant's specifications of error in this court are that the trial court erred:. Therefore we turn directly to such question. Directing attention to our statute it should be noted at the outset that G. Our system of jurisprudence is founded on the proposition that every litigant has a right to be heard. The right to be heard carries with it the absolute right to be represented by counsel, and the right of counsel to assist the court by oral argument in analyzing the evidence and applying the law.
Long ago, as early as , with existing statutory provisions similar to those just quoted, this court in Douglass v. Hill, 29 Kan. Our later case of Dent v. Simpson, 81 Kan. It reads:. In paragraph 3 of the Syllabus in the recent case of Boucher v. Roberts, Kan. See, also, page of the opinion which reads:. Appellees suggest that nothing in the record amounts to a clear request for an opportunity to argue the case and, therefore, the right to argue was waived.
Without repeating what has been heretofore presented from the record, it suffices to say that the previously quoted colloquy between the court and counsel, and the emphasized statements in the journal entry, which under our decisions Stock v.
Union Pacific Railroad Co. Hess, Kan. Catino, Kan. Of a certainty it cannot be denied that the court definitely stated that after the suggested findings of fact and conclusions of law were filed it would fix a date for argument. We cannot agree our existing decisions warrant or permit a conclusion that an argument to reverse, revise or amend is the equivalent of an argument before the issues are determined. There may be some cases where the matter sought to be argued has so little import on the issues that the refusal will be considered immaterial and nonprejudicial.
Be that as it may, we do not have an immaterial issue presented here. The court very frankly stated at the close of the hearing:. The court did, however, some ten months after the hearing, without benefit of a transcript and without benefit of argument by counsel, make findings of fact and conclusions of law on issues which are germane to a patent infringement action.
Little more need be said. We are convinced it affirmatively appears from the facts of record that appellant was denied the right to argue the merits of this case and that it did not waive that right by either silence or acquiescence.
Under the issues as presented, we will not review the record for the purpose of determining whether substantial justice has been done. We adhere to the theory that substantial justice is not done unless a litigant is given an opportunity to be heard. Unless counsel on timely request is given the right to analyze the facts and present his theory as to the application of the law, the litigant has not been heard.
The right to be heard is a matter of both private and public consequence. Argument by counsel has always been considered, by the courts of this state, and should continue to be considered as an effective aid in rendering justice. Wichita Precision Tool Co. Receive free daily summaries of new opinions from the Kansas Supreme Court. Richa v. Annotate this Case. Opinion filed July 7, The appellant presents the following question: "May the Trial Court deny to a party the absolute right to argue its case after said party has expressly stated to the Court that it desired argument, especially in a case involving the complex and technical law relating to United States Letters Patent?
Counsel have asked for findings of fact and conclusions of law. I realize that some of counsel are out of town. I wonder if it would be better to permit the court to go through this, maybe require you to brief it if you care to. You have asked for findings of fact and conclusions of law. If the defendant cares to submit any I'll require the plaintiff to because he is the one that requested them, and then permit oral argument.
Schmidt counsel for appellant : Yes, Your Honor, we would like to submit proposed findings and conclusions and would be very happy to return for oral argument after that.
Schmidt: I would say as Your Honor wishes. We'll be happy to clarify this for you from a patent standpoint in oral argument now or wait until the proposed findings and conclusions are submitted. Blaes counsel for appellees : In my judgment we would be of more help to you when the findings and conclusions are ready to be studied after you study them.
0コメント