Legal Opinion

Stuart v. Havens

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1885PublishedCited by 20 opinions

Error to the district court For Lancaster county. Tried below before Pound, J.

1Opinion of the CourtMaxwell, J.

The defendant in error brought an action against the plaintiff in the district court of Lancaster county to recover for injuries sustained by him by falling into an excavation made by the plaintiff on P street, in Lincoln, in front of lot 4, block 41, in said city. On the trial of the cause a verdict was returned in favor of the defendant in error for the sum of $500, upon which judgment was rendered.

The injury is alleged in the petition to have occurred on the 18th day of January, 1884, at which time it is stated that the plaintiff in error was possessed of the lot in question ; that “ on…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Sioux City & Pacific Railroad v. FinlaysonNebraska Supreme Court · 1884

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. City of South Bend v. TurnerIndiana Supreme Court · 1901
  2. Johnston v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1907
  3. Graves v. City of Battle CreekMichigan Supreme Court · 1893
  4. Lane v. Spokane Falls & Northern Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1899
  5. Ala. Great Southern R. R. v. HillSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890

15 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