Legal Opinion

Kuker v. Beindorff

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided December 4, 1901No. 10,730PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Error from the district court for Douglas county. Tried below before KeysoR, J.

1Opinion of the CourtSullivan, J.

The action in which this proceeding had its origin, was commenced before a justice of the peace and was aided by attachment. The summons was made returnable December 31 at 9 A. M., and was duly served upon the defendant, William Kuker, who appeared in the case only for the purpose of challenging the jurisdiction of the court. On the application of the plaintiff, Caroline Beindorff, the trial was adjourned from December 31 to January 8 at 9 A. M. On the day last named, at 10 o’clock A. M., the defendant was defaulted and judgment rendered against him for the amount claimed in the bill of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. County Board of Supervisors v. JonesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1865
  2. Smith v. VictorinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
  3. Driscoll v. SmithWisconsin Supreme Court · 1883

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Estate of SharonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
  2. Shambaugh v. Buffalo CountyNebraska Supreme Court · 1937
  3. Gloor v. TorczonNebraska Supreme Court · 1922
  4. H. P. Lau Co. v. ElgasNebraska Supreme Court · 1918
  5. Wagner v. Union Stock Yards Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1922

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

Powered by the Exa API