Legal Opinion

Marcell v. Midland Title Guarantee & Abstract Co.

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided July 7, 1924No. 22876PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Redick, District Judge.

This is an action brought by the' plaintiff against the defendant abstract company and the sureties on its bond for the purpose of recovering damages occasioned plaintiff by the failure of the abstract company to note in its abstract the existence of an attachment lien. The facts as disclosed by the evidence are, substantially, that plaintiff purchased from one Lulu Headington eight lots, relying upon abstracts prepared and certified by the defendant abstract company; that the abstracts noted the pendency of a certain suit in the district court for Douglas county…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Uhlig v. BarnumNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Chase v. HeaneyIllinois Supreme Court · 1873
  3. Morange v. . MixNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
  4. Security Abstract of Title Co. v. LongacreNebraska Supreme Court · 1898

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Shamblen v. Great Lakes Pipe Line Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1954
  2. Anchorage Independent School District v. StephensAlaska Supreme Court · 1962
  3. Nicola v. MeisnerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1957
  4. Selig v. Wunderlich Contracting CompanyNebraska Supreme Court · 1955
  5. Marley v. McCarthyNebraska Supreme Court · 1935

1 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