Legal Opinion · Dissent

Hiatt v. Tomlinson

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided June 3, 1916No. 19339Published

Appeal from the district court for Holt county: Robert R. Dickson, Judge.

1DissentRose, J.

I dissent from the decision of the majority on three fundamental grounds:

1. This is a civil action, and a preponderance of the evidence is sufficient to establish any issue in such a case. Patrick v. Leach, 8 Neb. 530; Search v. Miller, 9 Neb. 26; Kopplekom v. Huffman, 12 Neb. 95; Altschuler v. Algaza, 16 Neb. 631; Dunbar v. Briggs, 18 Neb. 94; Stevens v. Carson, 30 Neb. 544; First Nat Bank v. Goodman, 55 Neb. 409; Western Mattress Co. v. Potter, 1 Neb. (Unof.) 627; Schmuck v. Hill, 2 Neb. (Unof.) 79; Link v. Campbell, 72 Neb. 307; Kramer v. Weigand, 91 Neb. 47. To make “clear and…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Highway Commissioners v. ElyMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
  2. Buckmaster v. McElroyNebraska Supreme Court · 1886
  3. Search v. MillerNebraska Supreme Court · 1879
  4. Altschuler v. AlgazaNebraska Supreme Court · 1884
  5. Louisville & Jeffersonville Ferry Co. v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1898

9 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