Legal Opinion

Herbert v. Wortendyke

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided September 16, 1896No. 6759PublishedCited by 8 opinions

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

1Opinion of the Court

Irvine, C.

The plaintiff in error was plaintiff in the court below and the only attack he makes upon the judgment there in favor of the defendants is that it is contrary to the law and the evidence. The action was brought against Wortendyke, Spelts, Layne, and Irvine to recover damages for the conversion of certain chattels. Only Wortendyke and Spelts answered. By their answer they allege that on a certain day said chattels being then in the lawful possession of Layne, in Seward county, they were stolen by some person unknown; that Wortendyke was a justice of the peace for C precinct, Seward…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Anheuser-Busch Brewing Ass'n v. PetersonNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Hurlburt v. PalmerNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Kane v. Union Pacific RailroadNebraska Supreme Court · 1876

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Ware v. Delahaye & PurdySupreme Court of Iowa · 1895
  2. Shreeder v. DavisWashington Supreme Court · 1906
  3. Davis v. Nebraska National BankNebraska Supreme Court · 1897
  4. Bates-Smith Investment Co. v. ScottNebraska Supreme Court · 1898
  5. Burlington Voluntary Relief Department v. MooreNebraska Supreme Court · 1897

3 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