Legal Opinion

Van Burg v. Van Engen

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided June 8, 1906No. 14,350PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Error to tbe district court for Lancaster county: Lincoln Frost, Judge.

1Opinion of the Court

Epperson, C.

Tbe plaintiff was employed under *a verbal contract to dig a well for tbe defendant; and, on September 30, 1904, brought this suit to recover $65, tbe remainder alleged to be due upon tbe contract price. Plaintiff introduced evidence to tbe effect that said contract was entered into and. completed in May, 1901.. Defendant testified that the contract was entered into in the spring of 1900. Tbe main contention in tbe case is that tbe action is barred by tbe statute of limitations. Tbe jury returned a verdict for plaintiff for $65 and interest, and defendant prosecutes error to this…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Eayrs v. NasonNebraska Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Hanna v. Emerson, Talcott & Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Hobson v. CumminsNebraska Supreme Court · 1899
  4. McCormick Harvesting Machine Co. v. CumminsNebraska Supreme Court · 1899

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. League v. VaniceNebraska Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Millman v. County of ButlerNebraska Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Roan Eagle v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Garcia v. City of OmahaNebraska Supreme Court · 2024
  5. Scott v. DeGrawNebraska Supreme Court · 1911

1 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