Harbach v. Miller
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error to the district court for Douglas county. Tried below before Savage, J. cited Tyler on Ejectment, etc., 848. Coulter’s Case, 5 Coke R., 30. Oreen v. Biddle, 8 Wheat, 81-82. Jackson v. Loomis, 4 Cow., 168. Hylton v. Brown, 2 Wash. C. C., 165. Sedwick Meas. Dam. (126), 141, and cit. Dothage v. Stuart, 35 Mo., 251. Morrison v. Robinson, 31 Pa.
Read the full summary
Error to the district court for Douglas county. Tried below before Savage, J. cited Tyler on Ejectment, etc., 848. Coulter’s Case, 5 Coke R., 30. Oreen v. Biddle, 8 Wheat, 81-82. Jackson v. Loomis, 4 Cow., 168. Hylton v. Brown, 2 Wash. C. C., 165. Sedwick Meas. Dam. (126), 141, and cit. Dothage v. Stuart, 35 Mo., 251. Morrison v. Robinson, 31 Pa. St., 456. Worthington v. Young, 8 Ohio, 401. Harr all v. Gray, 12 Neb., 544. Bouvier’s L. Die., Mesne Profits. cited Roswell V. Blake, 2 Pick., 505. Denny v. Osborn, 4 Cow., 329. Schlemmer v. North, 32 Mo., 206. White v. Moses, 21 Cal., 34.
1Opinion of the CourtCobb, J.
The question in this case arises upon certain instructions given and refused, and is most fully presented by the instruction numbered 2, given at the request of the plaintiff, in the following words: “The fact that the houses in question may not have been on the premises or been fit for occupancy at the time when the bond was given, should the jury find such to be the fact, does not prevent the *11plaintiff from recovering the value of the rents and occupation, as found by the jury, after the erection of the houses and while fit for occupancy.” It appears from the record, that at the November,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gunnison v. BancroftSupreme Court of Vermont · 1839
3Cited by2 opinions
- Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald & Mallory Construction Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1894
- Flory v. Supreme Tribe of Ben HurNebraska Supreme Court · 1915