Legal Opinion

Moline, Milburn & Stoddard Co. v. Neville

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided November 21, 1893No. 5402PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Error from the district court of Cass county. Tried below before Chapman, J. Durrell v. Emery, 9 Atl. Rep. [N. H.], 97; Dixon v. Ahern, 14 Pao. Rep. [Nev.], 598; Lathrop v. Standard Oil Co., 9 S. E. Rep., [Ga.], 1041; Depere Co. v. Reynen, 22 N. W. Rep. [Wis.], 761; United States Mfg. Co. v„ Stevens, 17 N. W. Rep. [Mich-.], 934.

1Opinion of the Court

Ryan, C.

This action was originally commenced before a justice of the peace in Cass county, Nebraska. Prom a judgment rendered in favor of the p'aintiff in that court the defendant appealed to the district court of said county, wherein plaintiff's cause of action, omitting the mere formal parts, was stated in the following language:

“1. And now conies the above named plaintiff, and for cause of action states: At the special instance and request of the defendant, a corporation, plaintiff furnished its storage room for goods, wares, merchandise, and property of said defendant during the year…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Morgan v. BergenNebraska Supreme Court · 1874

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Moline, Milburn & Stoddard Co. v. NevilleNebraska Supreme Court · 1897

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

Powered by the Exa API