Masters v. Lee
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error from the district court of Dodge county. Tried below before Marshall, J. contending that upon the ground of conspiracy the right of plaintiff to recover is complete and unavoidable, cited: Muetze v. Tuteur, 46 N. W. Rep. [Wis.], 124; Cooley, Torts, 421; Albrecht v. Treitschke, 17 Neb., 205; Carew v. Rutherford, 106 Mass., 1; Gregory v. Brunswick, 6 Man. & Gr. [Eng.], 205; Mqpstrick v. Ramge, 9 Neb., 393; Swan v. Saddlemire, 8 Wend. [N. Y.], 676. contending that the…
Read the full summary
Error from the district court of Dodge county. Tried below before Marshall, J. contending that upon the ground of conspiracy the right of plaintiff to recover is complete and unavoidable, cited: Muetze v. Tuteur, 46 N. W. Rep. [Wis.], 124; Cooley, Torts, 421; Albrecht v. Treitschke, 17 Neb., 205; Carew v. Rutherford, 106 Mass., 1; Gregory v. Brunswick, 6 Man. & Gr. [Eng.], 205; Mqpstrick v. Ramge, 9 Neb., 393; Swan v. Saddlemire, 8 Wend. [N. Y.], 676. contending that the publication is not libelous per se, cited : Townshend, Slander & Libel, secs. 146-148, 132, 191, 345, 200, 181; Newbold v.…
1Opinion of the Court
Ryan, C.
On the 17th day of February, 1890, plaintiff filed his amended petition in the district court of Dodge county, in which he alleged that the defendant, unlawfully, maliciously, and wickedly, intending, designing, and contriving how to injure the plaintiff and ruin the plaintiff in his credit and make it impossible for the plaintiff to obtain the necessaries of life, and goods, wares, and merchandise on credit from and among the merchants of the city of Fremont and throughout the states of Nebraska, Iowa, and Kansas,did falsely publish and cause it to be believed that the plaintiff,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Muetze v. TuteurWisconsin Supreme Court · 1890
3Cited by1 opinion
- Fry v. McCord Bros.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1895