Legal Opinion

Barton v. Hobbs

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided May 26, 1967No. 36474PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCarter, J.

Plaintiff brought this action against Ernest Hobbs and Charles R. Hobbs, a partnership doing business as E. E. Hobbs & Son, for damages resulting from injuries sustained in a cave-in of a sewer ditch. At the close of the evidence, the trial court directed a verdict for the defendants. After argument on the motion for a new trial, the trial court sustained the motion and granted a new trial. The defendants Hobbs have appealed. Earthworms, Inc., was made a party defendant for subrogation purposes as the employer of the plaintiff to whom it has paid compensation under the workmen’s compensation…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Standard Oil Co. v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
  2. Anderson v. EvansNebraska Supreme Court · 1957
  3. Bingaman v. Estate of BingamanNebraska Supreme Court · 1951
  4. Mansfield v. Andrew Murphy & SonNebraska Supreme Court · 1941
  5. Fritchley v. Love-Courson Drilling Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1964

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Cruz v. LopezNebraska Supreme Court · 2018
  2. Rudolf v. Tombstone Pizza Corp.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Meyer v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceNebraska Supreme Court · 1975
  4. Schwartz v. Riekes and SonsNebraska Supreme Court · 1976
  5. Josh Kaul v. Wisconsin State LegislatureWisconsin Supreme Court · 2025

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API