Mills v. Paynter
Nebraska Supreme Court
This was an action for the recovery of the possession of real property, brought in the District Court for Douglas county.. .The answer was as follows : “And now comes George M. Mills, the defendant, and for.answer to the matters contained in the petition of the plaintiff, says that he denies all the statements and allegations in said petition contained.
Read the full summary
This was an action for the recovery of the possession of real property, brought in the District Court for Douglas county.. .The answer was as follows : “And now comes George M. Mills, the defendant, and for.answer to the matters contained in the petition of the plaintiff, says that he denies all the statements and allegations in said petition contained. “And this defendant, further answering, denies that the said plaintiff now is, or was, on the first day of May, 1857, seized of the lands and premises in said petition described, to wit: lot number eight, in block one hundred and thirty-five,…
1Opinion of the CourtWakklt, J.
An “action for the recovery of real property,” the simplified name substituted by the Code for the' action of ejectment, was brought by Paynter against Mills. '
Before the petition was answered the plaintiff obtained leave to amend it. The amended petition was demurred to, the demurrer was overruled, and the defendant answered. On motion of the plaintiff certain parts of the answer were stricken out, whereupon an amended^ answer was filed. To- á part of the amended answer plaintiff ■demurred; the demurrer was sustained, and to the other part of the amended answer a replication was filed. A…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Buck v. ReedNebraska Supreme Court · 1889
- Deseret National Bank v. NuckollsNebraska Supreme Court · 1890