Legal Opinion

Wheeler v. Van Sickle

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided September 20, 1893No. 4939PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Error from the district court of Lancaster county. Tried below before Tibbets, J.

1Opinion of the Court

Irvine, C.

The defendant in error recovered judgment in the district court of Lancaster county against the plaintiff in error for commissions claimed to have been earned in procuring a purchaser for real estate of the plaintiff in error.

The. plaintiff in error contends that the court erred in refusing to give the third instruction asked by him. This instruction was as follows:

“You are instructed that before plaintiff can recover he must prove by a preponderance of evidence that he was the procuring cause of making a sale, or of producing a purchaser who is willing, ready, and able to buy on…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Reed v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadNebraska Supreme Court · 1915

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

Powered by the Exa API