Legal Opinion

Blomgren v. Anderson

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided May 6, 1896No. 6600PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Error from the district court of Burt county. Tried below before Ferguson, J.

1Opinion of the CourtPost, C. J.

The defendant in error was permitted to recover in the district court of Burt county for work and labor performed under an alleged special agreement. According to the allegations of his petition, he labored for the defendant therein (plaintiff in error) three months, to-wit, during the months of December, 1891, and January and February, 1892, at the agreed rate of $20 per month. The answer consists of a general denial and an allegation that the services claimed for were by agreement rendered as an equivalent for the plaintiff’s board and lodging, during the months above named. Evidence was…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Weidner v. . PhillipsNew York Court of Appeals · 1889

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Barr v. PostNebraska Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Fitch v. MartinNebraska Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Furlong & Meloy v. North British & Mercantile InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1907
  4. Farmers State Bank v. YenneyNebraska Supreme Court · 1905
  5. Landis & Schick v. WattsNebraska Supreme Court · 1908

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API