Sonnenschein v. Bartels

This case was before us at the September, 1893, term, at which time a decision was announced affirming the judgment of the district court. (See Sonnenschein v. Bartels, 37 Neb., 592.) Subsequently, it appearing that we had overlooked the fourteenth assignment of the petition in error, a rehearing was ordered. The error therein assigned is the receiving, over the plaintiffs’ objection, of evidence tending to prove that the sureties on certain notes executed by Anton and Dominick Brazada in the firm name of Brazada Bros, to Bartels, had incumbered and disposed of their property subsequent to…