Legal Opinion

Carroll v. Polfus

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided September 20, 1915No. 18239PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal from the district court for Harlan county: Ernest B. Perry, Judge.

1Opinion of the CourtLetton, J.

Action for specific performance of a contract for the exchange of real estate. The defense is that at the time the contract was entered into the defendant was in such a state of intoxication that he was incapacitated from entering into a contract or exercising judgment, and that the value of the property taken in exchange for that of defendant was and is grossly inadequate in value. At the request of defendant a jury was impaneled to make special findings of fact, which are as follows:

“If you find that the defendant did sign the contract, at the time it was signed was he so intoxicated that…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State Bank v. GreenNebraska Supreme Court · 1879
  2. Kountze v. ErckNebraska Supreme Court · 1895

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Rhoades v. State Real Estate CommissionNebraska Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Taylor v. KoenigsteinNebraska Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Walter v. GillanNebraska Supreme Court · 1935
  4. United Mineral Products Co. v. Nebraska Railroads of Western Trunk Lines CommitteeNebraska Supreme Court · 1964
  5. In re WorleyDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 1943

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