Printable Format66-297. Persons upon whom demand may be made. The demand mentioned in K.S.A. 66-296 may be made of any ticket agent or station agent of such railway company or corporation, or the assignee or lessee thereof.
History: L. 1874, ch. 94, ยง 3; March 4; R.S. 1923, 66-297.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Act applies to receiver operating railroad. Rouse v. Redinger, 1 Kan. App. 355, 360, 41 P. 433.
2. Proof of demand must be made in accordance with preceding section. C.K. & W. Rld. Co. v. Totten, 1 Kan. App. 558, 565, 42 P. 269; K.P. Rly. Co. v. Ball, 19 Kan. 535.
3. Evidence required to prove demand. A.T. & S.F. Rld. Co. v. Bartlett, 2 Kan. App. 167, 43 P. 284.
4. Demand need not specify particular breach of duty relied on. Railway Co., v. Hart, 7 Kan. App. 550, 51 P. 933.
5. Demand upon general superintendent of company held sufficient. Central Branch Rld. Co. v. Ingram, 20 Kan. 66.
6. Notice need not specify amount of attorney fees claimed. Central Branch Rld. Co. v. Ingram, 20 Kan. 66, 71.
7. Demand upon stock and claim adjuster held sufficient demand. Union Trust Co. v. Kendall, 20 Kan. 515, 519.
8. Demand upon station and ticket agent held sufficient demand. K.C.F.S. & G. Rld. Co. v. Frazier, 23 Kan. 698.
9. Proof of demand; copy held erroneously admitted. C.B.U.P. Rld. Co. v. Walters, 24 Kan. 504.
10. Sufficiency of evidence; demurrer to evidence overruled; verdict sustained. K.C. Ft. S. & G. Rld. Co. v. Foster, 39 Kan. 329, 330, 18 P. 285.
11. Person upon whom demand made; proof of fact of agency. St. L. & S. F. Rly. Co. v. Kinman, 49 Kan. 627, 31 P. 126.
12. Demand necessary; new action alleging demand held barred. Becker v. Railway Co., 70 Kan. 193, 78 P. 408.