Legal Opinion

Sturm v. Lloyd

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided January 2, 1936No. 29485PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCarter, J.

This is an action at law to recover on a promissory note. At the close of the evidence both parties moved for a directed verdict. Defendant’s motion was sustained by the trial court and a judgment for defendant entered. From the overruling of his motion for a new trial plaintiff appeals.

The evidence shows that on March 6, 1923, John W. Lloyd and Lissa Lloyd, his wife, executed and delivered to Andrew F. Sturm their promissory note for $863.30, bearing interest at 8 per cent. The evidence is undisputed that payments had been made thereon, the last under date of May 4, 1929. The note sued upon…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Grand Island Banking Co. v. WrightNebraska Supreme Court · 1898
  2. McKinney v. HerrickSupreme Court of Iowa · 1885
  3. First National Bank v. ErnstNebraska Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Biltwell Tire & Battery Co. v. BookNebraska Supreme Court · 1924
  5. John Fletcher College v. Estate of PailingNebraska Supreme Court · 1931

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Conley v. HaysNebraska Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. LapidusNebraska Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Harbine Bank v. McCuneNebraska Supreme Court · 1936
  4. Marmet v. MarmetNebraska Supreme Court · 1955

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

Powered by the Exa API