Legal Opinion

Riverside Coal Co. v. Holmes

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided May 2, 1893No. 4852PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Error from the district court of Lancaster county. Tried below before Tibbets, J.

1Opinion of the Court

Irvine, C.

The plaintiff in error began this action to recover the sum of $68.86 with interest, for coal sold and delivered by-plaintiff to defendant. The defendant by answer admitted his indebtedness to plaintiff as alleged in the petition and counter-claimed for damages, alleging that in April, 1888, a contract was entered into between the parties whereby the plaintiff agreed to furnish to defendant all coal that defendant should require in his brick yards during the season of 1888 at an agreed price of $3 per ton; that plaintiff failed and refused to furnish such coal, and that defendant…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Volker v. First National BankNebraska Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Denver, T. & G. R. v. Hutchins & HyattNebraska Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Burkholder v. BurkholderNebraska Supreme Court · 1888

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Wachsmuth v. Orient InsuranceNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Beavers v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1896
  3. Hanlon v. Union Pacific Railway Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Dickenson v. Columbus State BankNebraska Supreme Court · 1904
  5. Hogue-Kellogg Co. v. BakerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920

5 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