Johnson v. Parrotte
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error to the -district court for Buffalo county. Tried below before Hamer,- J. on insufficiency of petition, cited: Boone’s Code Pleading, Sec. 24. Maxwell’s PI. and Pr., 236. On granting new trial, cited: Sedan v. Church, 29 Kas., 190. Sang v. Beers, 20 Neb., •365.
1Opinion of the Court
Reese, Ch. J.
This was an action by plaintiff in error for damages, growing out of the alleged misrepresentations by defendants in error as to the quality of a number of sheep traded by them to plaintiff in error. It is not quite clear as to whether plaintiff in error,' by his petition, sought to charge -a fraudulent transaction on the part of *234defendants in error, by a false representation as to the quality of the sheep, or whether the action was intended to be for a breach of warranty. It is alleged in the petition that prior to the transaction the plaintiff was the owner of the north-east…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Artman v. West Point Manufacturing Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1884
3Cited by2 opinions
- Johnson v. ParrotteNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
- Johnson v. ParrotteNebraska Supreme Court · 1892