Legal Opinion · Dissent

A. J. Neimeyer Lumber Co. v. Burlington & Missouri River Railroad

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided March 17, 1898No. 7691Published

Error from tlie district court of Douglas county. Tried below before Ambrosio, J. See opinions for references to authorities.

1DissentNorval, J.

I do not concur in the judgment just rendered. There is no controversy as to the material facts. Simpson, Perkins & Co. were wbolesale dealers in lumber at Dallas, Texas, from whom C. N. Deitz, without plaintiff’s knowledge, before January 8, 1892, ordered 20 cars of lum-. *344ber to be delivered to himself at Omaha. Simpson, Perkins & Oo. thereupon'sent a letter, inclosing order for the 20 cars of lumber, to the plaintiff, the A. J. Neimeyer Lumber Company, at'Waldo, Arkansas. The letter is as follows:

“Dallas, Texas, Jan. 8, 1892.
“A. J. Neimeyer Lumber Company, Waldo, Arle. — Gentlemen: We…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. The Bank of Rochester v. . JonesNew York Court of Appeals · 1851
  2. Suit v. WoodhallMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
  3. Michigan Central Railroad v. PhillipsIllinois Supreme Court · 1871
  4. Sheffield Furnace Co. v. Hull Coal & Coke Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1893
  5. Capehart v. Furman Farm Improvement Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1893

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

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

Powered by the Exa API