Legal Opinion

Hendrix v. Kirkpatrick

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided June 2, 1896No. 6625PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Error from tbe district court of Sarpy county. Tried below before Scott, J.

1Opinion of the CourtPost, C. J.

Counsel for tbe plaintiff in error frankly admits that tbe only question presented by tbe record of this case is whether tbe evidence is sufficient to sustain tbe finding that there was an account stated by tbe parties as alleged in tbe petition below, and upon which a recovery was allowed by the district court for Sarpy county. Tbe specific allegation to tbe petition, to which-Mhe verdict and judgment are responsive, is that there is due from tbe defendant to tbe plaintiff therein a balance of $137.82 for work and labor as per settlement on or about January 27, 1892, and which sum tbe said…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Sharkey v. . MansfieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
  2. McKinster v. HitchcookNebraska Supreme Court · 1886
  3. Claire v. ClaireNebraska Supreme Court · 1880

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. PalmerNebraska Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Robinson v. WitteraNebraska Supreme Court · 1933
  3. Zander v. Lutheran BrotherhoodCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1943
  4. John Deere Co. v. Ramacciotti Equipment Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1967
  5. Haish v. DillonNebraska Supreme Court · 1904

4 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