Hiatt v. Brooks
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error to the district court for York county. Tried below before Norval, J. The opinion, taken in connection with that filed when the case was before this court at the July term, 1882, states the facts of the case. 6 Wait’s Actions and Defenses, 571. Wolf v. Marsh, 54 Cal., 228. Wells’ Res Adjudicata, § 613 et seq. Lesse v. Clark, 20 Cal., 417. Parker v. Pomeroy, 2 Wis., 122.
1Opinion of the Court
Cobb, Ch. J.
This case was before this court and disposed of by an opinion in favor of the then plaintiff, now defendant in error, and reported in 13 Neb., 503;
In' so far as the written contract between the parties, consisting of the notes and article of agreement, were construed by the court in that opinion, such construction will be adhered to as the law of the case. This court having announced its views as to the proper construction of the contract, and ordered a new trial to be governed by the principles thus announced, it would be inadmissible to review the ground of such opinion, now…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Boland v. Missouri RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1865
- Vinton v. SchwabSupreme Court of Vermont · 1860
- Brooks v. HiattNebraska Supreme Court · 1882
3Cited by12 opinions
- Gohman v. City of St. BernardOhio Supreme Court · 1924
- City of Hastings v. FoxworthyNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
- Marion v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1886
- Oregon Railway & Navigation Co. v. DacresWashington Supreme Court · 1890
- Patterson v. ChaneyNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1918
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.