Legal Opinion

Petersen v. Hitchcock

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided February 14, 1935No. 29149PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGood, J.

This is an action for specific performance of an alleged *382oral contract between plaintiff and James Japson, now deceased, wherein Japson agreed to make a will giving to plaintiff all of his property of which he might die possessed. Hitchcock, as administrator of the estate of Japson, is the sole defendant.

The following is the substance of the oral contract declared upon: That in 1904 Japson was living in Havelock, Nebraska, and plaintiff was living in Plattsmouth, Nebraska; that Japson agreed that, if plaintiff would come to Havelock, take care of Japson and help him in his business affairs…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Kofka v. RosickyNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
  2. McKenney v. MinahanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Briggs v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  4. In re the Estate of HeydenfeldtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  5. Harrison v. HarrisonNebraska Supreme Court · 1907

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Taylor v. ClarkNebraska Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Rogers v. CasadyNebraska Supreme Court · 1938
  3. McLaughlin v. HeathNebraska Supreme Court · 1957
  4. McLaughlin v. HeathNebraska Supreme Court · 1957

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

Powered by the Exa API