Legal Opinion

Hake v. Woolner

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided June 23, 1898No. 8163PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Ebbob from the district court of Otoe county. Tried below before Chapman, J.

1Opinion of the CourtNob val, J.

A reversal of the judgment is asked on account of certain rulings of the court below during the progress of the trial, alleged errors in the instructions, and that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict. All of these matters, to be available here, must have been raised by the motion for a new trial. (Miller v. Antelope County, 35 Neb. 237; Viergutz v. Aultman, 46 Neb. 141; Dillon v. State, 39 Neb. 92; Losure v. Miller, 45 Neb, 465; Barr v. *472City of Omaha, 42 Neb. 341; Barton v. McKay, 36 Neb. 632.) Tbe transcript contains a paper designated as a “motion for a new trial,” but tbe…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Barr v. City of OmahaNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Romberg v. FokkenNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
  3. Barton v. McKayNebraska Supreme Court · 1893
  4. Dillon v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
  5. Miller v. Antelope CountyNebraska Supreme Court · 1892

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Lee v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1932
  2. State ex rel. McDonald v. FarringtonNebraska Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. YoungNebraska Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Greer v. GrosseNebraska Supreme Court · 1910

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

Powered by the Exa API