Kliment v. Corcoran
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error from the district court of Saunders county. Tried below before Bates, J. The opinion contains a statement of the case. The wife having procured intoxicating liquors and furnished them to her husband, thus contributing to the injury of which she complained in her petition, should not be permitted to recover in this action.
Read the full summary
Error from the district court of Saunders county. Tried below before Bates, J. The opinion contains a statement of the case. The wife having procured intoxicating liquors and furnished them to her husband, thus contributing to the injury of which she complained in her petition, should not be permitted to recover in this action. (.Kearney v. Fitzgerald, 43 la., 580; Elliott v. Barry, 34 Hun [N. Y.], 129; lioseeranz v. Shoemaker, 60 Mich., 4; McDonald v. Gasey, 47 N. W. Rep. [Mich.], 1104; Regret v. Bell, 77 111., 593; Engleken v. Hilger, 43 la., 563; Brooks v. Gook, 38 Am. Rep. [Mich.], 282.)
1Opinion of the CourtPost, C. J.
This was an action in the district court for Saunders county, wherein the defendant in error’s intestate, Amelia Kratky, as the widow of Florian Y. Kratky, deceased, sued to recover from the defendants below, Kliment, Widman, and Simodynese, separately engaged as licensed saloon-keepers, the cause of action alleged being the furnishing to the plaintiff’s said husband of intoxicating liquors in sufficient quantities to, and which did in fact, cause the latter to become an habitual drunkard. It is further in substance charged that the said Florian Kratky was, previous to the acts complained of,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Gran v. HoustonNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
- Curtin v. AtkinsonNebraska Supreme Court · 1893
- Buckmaster v. McElroyNebraska Supreme Court · 1886
3Cited by3 opinions
- Yechout v. TesnohlidekNebraska Supreme Court · 1914
- Walters v. Village of ExeterNebraska Supreme Court · 1910
- Colman v. LoeperNebraska Supreme Court · 1913