Ashland Land & Live-Stock Co. v. May
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error to the district court of Saunders county. Tried below before Bates, J. argued that they did not understand the rule to be that, because the verdict might be sustained by sufficient evidence, counsel might resort to the method pursued in this case for the purpose of insuring success.
Read the full summary
Error to the district court of Saunders county. Tried below before Bates, J. argued that they did not understand the rule to be that, because the verdict might be sustained by sufficient evidence, counsel might resort to the method pursued in this case for the purpose of insuring success. See Cleveland Paper Co. v. Banlcs, 15 Nebr., 20; Ashland Land & Live-Stoclc Co. v. May, 51 Nebr., 474. They understand the rule on this subject to be that, if the matter stated to the jury was not such as might be proven on the trial, it was misconduct. See Stratton v. Rye, 45 Nebr., 619; Thompson, Trials,…
1Opinion of the CourtSullivan, J.
This proceeding in error brings up for review a judgment of the district court in favor of Alfred May and *736against the Ashland Land & Live-Stock Company. The action was brought for services alleged to have been rendered under a contract of hiring. The defendant is the owner of a stock ranch in Saunders county, where the plaintiff was employed in some capacity for about fourteen months. The plaintiff claims he was acting as manager and veterinarian, while the defendant insists that he was merely doing chores and other light work for his board. The jury decided in favor of May, and the first…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Hall v. RiceNebraska Supreme Court · 1929
- Sandomierski v. FixemerNebraska Supreme Court · 1957
- Cooper v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1931
- Lewis v. BeckardNebraska Supreme Court · 1929
- Johnson v. NathanNebraska Supreme Court · 1955
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.