Kaufman v. Coburn
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error to tbe district court for Douglas county. Tried below before Doane, J. cited: Davis v. Scott, 27 Neb., 642; Schars v. Barnd, Id., 94; Harhrader v. Leiby, 4 O. St., 602; Carson v. Byers, 67 la., 606-11; Lininger v. Raymond, 12 Neb., 19-25; Kieth v. Heffelfinger, Id., 497; Swilz v. Bruce, 16 Id., 466; Whitfield v. Stiles, 24 N. W. Rep. [Mich.], 119; •Grimes v. Farrington, 19 Neb., 44; Deitrich v. Hutchinson,, 20 Id., 52; Merrill v. Wedgwood, 41 N. W. Rep., 149; Sloan, v.…
Read the full summary
Error to tbe district court for Douglas county. Tried below before Doane, J. cited: Davis v. Scott, 27 Neb., 642; Schars v. Barnd, Id., 94; Harhrader v. Leiby, 4 O. St., 602; Carson v. Byers, 67 la., 606-11; Lininger v. Raymond, 12 Neb., 19-25; Kieth v. Heffelfinger, Id., 497; Swilz v. Bruce, 16 Id., 466; Whitfield v. Stiles, 24 N. W. Rep. [Mich.], 119; •Grimes v. Farrington, 19 Neb., 44; Deitrich v. Hutchinson,, 20 Id., 52; Merrill v. Wedgwood, 41 N. W. Rep., 149; Sloan, v. Coburn, 26 Neb., 607; York Bank v. Carter, 38 Pa. St., 446; Chase v. Walters, 28 la., 460; Dart v. Farmers Bank, 27…
1Opinion of the CourtMaxwell, J.
This is an action of replevin brought in the district court of Douglas county, aud as the petition and answer purport to set out the facts as claimed by each party, they are hereby given. The amended petition is as follows:
“ The plaintiffs complain of the defendant and allege for cause of action that they are the absolute and unqualified owners of the goods, wares, and merchandise described as follows, to-wit: All the goods, chattels, wares, and merchandise, consisting of the stock of tobacco, pipes, cigar-holders, cigars, fancy articles, cigarettes, including all the stock of goods,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bonns v. CarterNebraska Supreme Court · 1886
3Cited by3 opinions
- Kaufman v. U. S. National BankNebraska Supreme Court · 1891
- Davis v. National Bank of CommerceNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
- Smith v. Choy YinHawaii Supreme Court · 1929