Mapstrick v. Ramge
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error to the district court of Douglas county. In the county court, where the action was brought, Ramge, plaintiff there, had verdict and judgment in his favor, which was affirmed on error in the district court. From the judgment of affirmance Mapstrick and others, defendants in the county court, brought the case here upon a petition in error. There is no conspiracy in this case.
Read the full summary
Error to the district court of Douglas county. In the county court, where the action was brought, Ramge, plaintiff there, had verdict and judgment in his favor, which was affirmed on error in the district court. From the judgment of affirmance Mapstrick and others, defendants in the county court, brought the case here upon a petition in error. There is no conspiracy in this case. Conspiracy in the eye of the law is the corrupt agreeing together of two or more persons to do by concerted action something unlawful as a means or end. Bishop, sec. 149. The act must be unlawful, and it must be…
1Opinion of the CourtCobb, J.
The plaintiff in error makes two points: First, that the petition in the court below does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action; and second, that said cause, which was originally tried in the county court of Douglas county, was’ argued and submitted to the jury, verdict rendered, etc., on the seventeenth day of May, 1876, that being after the third ^Monday of the month, at a time when the court had no authority to act.
The petition is certainly rather scant, and had a motion been made for an order requiring the plaintiff to make it more definite and certain, it would…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Lohse Patent Door Co. v. FuelleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1908
- Farley v. PeeblesNebraska Supreme Court · 1897
- Jetton-Dekle Lumber Co. v. MatherSupreme Court of Florida · 1907
- Carter v. OsterMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908
- Mining Securities Co. v. WallMontana Supreme Court · 1935
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.