Legal Opinion · Dissent

Jessup v. Davis

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided November 19, 1926No. 24265Published

1DissentGood, J.

For the reasons hereinafter set forth, I cannot concur in that part of the majority opinion which holds: “Where a plaintiff in a personal injury action seeks by appropriate interrogatories on the cross-examination to discover whether the defendant is indemnified from loss by an insurance. company, it is error for the court to sustain an objection to interrogatories which tend to develop the fact on that question.” It is true that this rule was previously announced in Miller v. Central Taxi Co., 110 Neb. 306. In that case, however, no reason for the rule was given save .that it was supposedly…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Simpson v. . Foundation Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1911
  2. Pierce v. United Gas and Electric Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
  3. Martin v. LillyIndiana Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Herrin, Lambert & Co. v. DalyMississippi Supreme Court · 1902
  5. Standridge v. MartinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1919

26 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