Clopper v. Poland
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error to the district court for Douglas county. Tried below, in 1878, before Valentine, J., of the sixth district. The opinion states the ease. Promise is void, not being in writing. Gen., Stat., 393. [Comp. Stat., Chap. 32.] Deposition of Elliott was inadmissible. And see also Second National Bank v. ■Grand Lodge, 8 Otto, 123. cited: Nelson v. Boynton, 3 Met., 402. Shelton v. Brewster, 8 Johnson, 376. 2 Parson Contracts, 9.
1Opinion of the Court
Maxwell, Ch. J.
In May, 1871, Eleury & Co. were indebted to the ■defendants in error in the sum of $489.30 upon an *70account. Fleury & Company at that time had extensive quarries near the mouth of the Platte river, and were engaged in burning lime and quarrying stone and selling ^he same to parties in Omaha, At the time above stated, the plaintiffs in error purchased all of Fleury & Co.’s interest in the stone quarry and lime kiln, and the defendants in error allege in their petition, and introduce testimony tending to prove that plaintiff in error assumed as a part of the consideration for said…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Corn v. SimsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1860
3Cited by11 opinions
- Fitzgerald v. MorrisseyNebraska Supreme Court · 1883
- Texter v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1960
- Rogers v. Empkie Hardware Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1888
- Nelson v. GareyNebraska Supreme Court · 1884
- S. W. Anderson Co. v. GlennDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 1942
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.