Maryland Casualty Co. v. Bank of Murdock
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error to the district court for Cass county: Paul Jes-sen, Judge.
1Opinion of the Court
Epperson, C.
This was an action instituted by the defendant in error, hereafter called plaintiff, against the plaintiff, in error, *315hereafter called defendant, in the district court for Oass county upon a contract of indemnity or policy of insurance against burglary. The process which' the plaintiff relied on was a summons served on the auditor of public accounts. A special appearance was filed by the defendant, which was overruled, and the same objectionable service was alleged in the answer. However, prior to the filing of the answer,' the defendant filed a written offer to confess judgment…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Marcus v. OtisCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1948
- Ferguson v. Phoenix Assurance Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1962
- Feldman Inv. Co. v. Connecticut General Life Ins.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1935
- Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. First Bank of FallisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
- Old Colony Insurance v. MoskiosCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.