Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Ruehle v. Ruehle

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided February 3, 1956No. 33629Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partSimmons, C. J.

As stated by Judge Carter, I concur in the conclusions reached by him on the issues presented by this appeal. I would, however, rest the decision on the issues presented by the parties and would hold that the judgment was satisfied by the agreement of October 12, 1948, and that that agreement was supported by a sufficient consideration. See, Asmus v. Longenecker, 131 Neb. 608, 269 N. W. 117; Fluckey v. Anderson, 132 Neb. 664, 273 N. W. 41; Koenig v. Koenig (Mo. App.), 191 S. W. 2d 269; Bidinger v. Bidinger, 89 Ohio App. 274, 101 N. E. 2d 241; Schnierle v. Schnierle, 33 Ohio L. Ab. 212, *71933 N. E.…

2Cases cited42 opinions

  1. Nelsen v. TilleyNebraska Supreme Court · 1939
  2. State ex rel. State Railway Commission v. RamseyNebraska Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Elmen v. State Board of Equalization & AssessmentNebraska Supreme Court · 1930
  4. James Poultry Co. v. City of Nebraska CityNebraska Supreme Court · 1939
  5. Shiers Ex Rel. Shiers v. CowgillNebraska Supreme Court · 1953

37 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