Legal Opinion

Paul v. Ziebell

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided January 5, 1895No. 5213PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error from the district court of Madison county. Tried below before Norris, J. cited: Maxwell, Justice Practice, 126; Hiteheoch v. MeKinster, 21 Neb., 148; In re Garst, 10 Neb., 78; Osborn v. Shotwelly 33 Neb., 348; Johnson v. Jones, 2 Neb., 137; Kepley v. Irwin, 14 Neb., 300; Rector Holy Trinity Church v* United States, 12 Sup. Ct. Rep., 512.

1Opinion of the CourtNor val, C. J.

This action was commenced by the plaintiff in error before H. G. Brueggemann, a justice of the peace in and for Norfolk precinct, Madison county, to recover the sum of $100.20. On the return day of the summons the defendant filed a motion for a change of venue to R. H. Maxwell, a justice of the peace for Battle Creek precinct, because of the bias and prejudice of Justice Brueggemann. The motion was accompanied by the following affidavit:

“ The State op Nebraska, Madison County.
“Gottlieb Ziebell, being first duly sworn, says that he is-the defendant above named; that he cannot, as he verily…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. In re GarstNebraska Supreme Court · 1880
  2. State ex rel. Proctor v. CottonNebraska Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Osborn v. ShotwellNebraska Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Peyton v. JohnsonNebraska Supreme Court · 1893

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Cox v. United StatesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1897
  2. Johnson v. MaysNebraska Supreme Court · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API