Legal Opinion

Reuther v. Zimbleman

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided January 7, 1897No. 6885PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error from the district court of Fillmore county. Tried below before Hastings, J.

1Opinion of the CourtNorval, J.

This was an action by John Reuther against Henry Zimbleman for the recovery of damages claimed to have been sustained by the plaintiff by the discharge of surface waters upon his lands by the defendant. The answer admits that, by the cutting of a ditch by the defendant, the waters of a pond on the land previously having no outlet were discharged upon plaintiff’s premises, denies that any damages viere thereby sustained by-plaintiff, and avers that such waters flowed in a natural waterway which crossed the lands of the latter. From a verdict and judgment in favor of the defendant, error is…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Romberg v. FokkenNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Andres v. KridlerNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
  3. Walter A. Wood Mowing & Reaping Machine Co. v. GerholdNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Beavers v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1896
  5. Childerson v. ChildersonNebraska Supreme Court · 1896

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Hale v. SheehanNebraska Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Palmer v. MiznerNebraska Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Union Stock Yards National Bank v. LambNebraska Supreme Court · 1912
  4. Kroeger v. NiemanNebraska Supreme Court · 1897

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

Powered by the Exa API