Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Schalkopf
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error from the district court of Lancaster county. Tried below before Holmes, J.
1Opinion of the CourtNorval, J.
This was ejectment by the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company to recover a part of lot 10, in block 5, of Mechanics’ Addition to the city of Lincoln. The answer consisted of a general, denial, and a plea of ten years of adverse possession of the property in the defendant and his grantors. In compliance with the provisions of the statute there were two trials of the cause in the court below, both of which resulted adversely to the plaintiff, and it has brought the record here for review.
It is alleged as a ground for reversal that the verdict is unsupported by the evidence. The…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Bigler v. BakerNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
- Omaha Real Estate & Trust Co. v. KragscowNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
- City of York v. SpellmanNebraska Supreme Court · 1886
- Gregory v. KenyonNebraska Supreme Court · 1892
- Morearty v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Clingan v. Dixon CountyNebraska Supreme Court · 1905
- D. J. O'Brien Co. v. Omaha Water Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1908