Legal Opinion

Ulrich v. McConaughey

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided November 20, 1901No. 9,994PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Error to the district court for Hamilton county. Tried below before Bates, J.

1Opinion of the Court

Pound, C.

This proceeding is brought to review a judgment for the defendant in an action of replevin. The facts, so far as material to the questions of law involved, may be stated best in connection with the several assignments of error to which they relate.

The first point urged is that since the answer is a general denial and the usual prayer for the alternative judgment for return of the property or for its value is omitted, no judgment could be rendered in favor of the defendant further than one for his costs. At first sight this position seems warranted by the authorities. Thus, a recent…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Young v. GlascockSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
  2. Wooldridge v. QuinnSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879
  3. Pico v. PicoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  4. Washburn v. HuntingtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  5. Chandler v. LincolnIllinois Supreme Court · 1869

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Culavin v. O'ConnorNebraska Supreme Court · 1917
  2. Shaver v. KappellasIndiana Court of Appeals · 1925
  3. Clark v. OldhamNebraska Supreme Court · 1958
  4. Jones v. ParkerWyoming Supreme Court · 1929
  5. Ulrich v. McConaugheyNebraska Supreme Court · 1903

4 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