Sager v. Summers
Nebraska Supreme Court
•Error from the district court of Fillmore county. Tried below before Hastings, J. The facts are stated in the opinion. The deed of assignment is not witnessed and is, therefore, null'and void. (.Harrison v. MoWhirter, 12 Neb., 155; Green v. Gross, 12 Neb., 123; Child v. Baker, 24 Neb., 188.) The assignment is valid.
Read the full summary
•Error from the district court of Fillmore county. Tried below before Hastings, J. The facts are stated in the opinion. The deed of assignment is not witnessed and is, therefore, null'and void. (.Harrison v. MoWhirter, 12 Neb., 155; Green v. Gross, 12 Neb., 123; Child v. Baker, 24 Neb., 188.) The assignment is valid. (Lancaster County Bank v. Horn, 34 Neb., 742; Weaver v. Cournbe, 15 Neb., 171; Paul-son v. Clough, 42 N. W. Eep. [Minn.], 398; Deere v. Losey, 48 Neb., 622; Commercial Nat. Bank v. Nebraska State Bank, 33 Neb., 305.)
1Opinion of the Court
Ragan, 0.
On the 10th day of July, 1893, one J. M. Burke, residing in Fillmore county, Nebraska, made an assignment for the benefit of all his creditors to Charles E. Summers, the sheriff of said county. This assignment appears to have been executed in exact conformity to the statutes, except that it was not witnessed. A creditor of Burke’s caused an execution to be issued and placed in the hands of one Jerome H. Sager, a constable, who seized a part of the property in the possession of Summers as assignee. Summers replevied the property, and on the trial in the district court he had a verdict…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Burbank v. EllisNebraska Supreme Court · 1878
- Green v. GrossNebraska Supreme Court · 1881
- Keeling v. HoytNebraska Supreme Court · 1891
- Pearson v. DavisNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
- Connell v. GalligherNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Rock Island Plow Co. v. BixbySupreme Court of Iowa · 1914
- Talmage v. Minton-Woodward Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1908