FRITZ DUREIN, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
THE STATE OF KANSAS; FRED ROSS ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, V. THE STATE OF KANSAS; AND FRED. SIMMONS ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, V. THE STATE OF KANSAS
FRITZ DUREIN, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
THE STATE OF KANSAS; FRED ROSS ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, V. THE STATE OF KANSAS; AND FRED. SIMMONS ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, V. THE STATE OF KANSAS
208 U.S. 613
Supreme Court of the United States (1908)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam.
Judgments affirmed with costs. Rippey v. Texas, 193 U. S. 504; case below, 70 Kansas, 1, and cases cited.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dirk, 305 So. 2d 187 (Fla. 1974)…also violates the rule that statutory presumptions may not operate retrospectively. 29 Am.Jur.2d § 159, n. 12; United States v. One 1939 Model Ford Pickup Truck, 35 F.Supp. 905 (E.D.S.C.1940), and State v. Durein, 70 Kan. 1, 78 P. 152 (1904), aff’d, 208 U.S. 613, 28 S.Ct. 567, 52 L.Ed. 645 (1907). The statute as interpreted provides that introduction into evidence of a check dishonored for insufficient funds constitutes prima facie evidence of knowledge of insufficient funds and intent to defraud. Under the…
Authorities Cited
- Rippey v. Texas, 193 U.S. 504 (U.S. 1904)