Legal Opinion
Farmers & Merchants Bank v. Upham
Nebraska Supreme Court
Decided June 30, 1893No. 4269PublishedCited by 2 opinions
Error from the district court of Valley county. Tried below before Harrison, J. When the court gives a prejudicial instruction on a proposition not before the jury, the judgment in such a ease should be reversed. (Holmes v. Boydston, 1 Neb., 358; Bunbier v. Bay, 12 Id., G04; Newton Wagon Co. v. Biers, 10 Id., 292; Turner v. O’Brien, 11 Id., 108; Steele v. Russell, 5 Id., 216; Smith v. Evans, 13 Id., 316.)
1Opinion of the Court
Maxwell, Ch. J.
This is an action upon a promissory note for the sum of $1,225 payable to the order of D. Collins. The note was duly indorsed and transferred to the plaintiff. The defendants’ answer is as follows:
“Come now the defendants and for answer to the petition of the plaintiff herein admit that they made, executed, and delivered to Dennis Collins & Co. the notes described in plaintiff’s petition, and that said notes are now past due and unpaid.”
“ 2. The defendants deny that the plaintiff is the owner of said notes, or ever has been, and allege that said notes are now and ever have been…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Mannion v. TalboyNebraska Supreme Court · 1906
- Sabin v. CameronNebraska Supreme Court · 1908