Legal Opinion

Whitney v. Spearman

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided February 16, 1897No. 7040PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Error from the district court of Sarpy county. Tried below before Blair, J.

1Opinion of the CourtPost, C. J.

On the 7th day of July, 1893, Hamilton M. Hinkle and Ethan H. Hinkle, doing business in Sarpy county in the firm name of Hinkle & Son, conveyed to the defendant, Cyrus K. Spearman, by chattel mortgage a stock of merchandise to secure the sum of $3,870, evidenced by three promissory notes of the mortgagors, to-wit, one for $1,200, maturing June 19,1893, one for $1,200, maturing June 19, 1894, and one for $1,487, maturing August 18, 1894. On the 20th day of July plaintiff in error, Whitney, as sheriff of Sarpy county, seized the property aforesaid in the possession of the mortgagee named to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Holmes v. First National BankNebraska Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Corbett v. FetzerNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
  3. True v. BullardNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
  4. Cortelyou, Ege & Vanzandt v. HiattNebraska Supreme Court · 1893

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Sorensen v. State BankNebraska Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Jaster v. CurrieNebraska Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Lanigan v. MilesWashington Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Benes v. MatulkaNebraska Supreme Court · 1968
  5. Sarpy County State Bank v. H. M. Hinkle & SonNebraska Supreme Court · 1897

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

Powered by the Exa API