Foxworthy v. City of Hastings
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error to the district court for Adams county. Tried below before Gaslin, J. The city’s liability is now res adjudieata. (Foxworthy v. Hastings, 25 Neb., 133; Weave v. Fitchburg, 110 Mass., 334; Joliet v. Verley, 35 111., 64.) The biased remarks of the juror, vitiate the verdict. (Thornton, Juries, sec. 438; Harrison v. Price, 22 Ind., 1650
1Opinion of the Court
Cobb, Ch. J.
This action was last heard at the July term, 1888, when the judgment of the district court was reversed, on error, and the cause remanded. (25 Neb., 133.)
The cause remanded was tried again to a jury, with verdict for the defendant. There was a motion for a new-trial, which was overruled, and a bill of exceptions taken, based upon the refusal of a new trial, for lack of evidence to sustain the verdict. There is no complaint of any ruling of the court pending the trial. The fundamental ground of error is whether there was sufficient evidence to sustain a verdict against the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Weare v. Inhabitants of FitchburgMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
- Foxworthy v. City of HastingsNebraska Supreme Court · 1888
3Cited by6 opinions
- Gohman v. City of St. BernardOhio Supreme Court · 1924
- City of Hastings v. FoxworthyNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
- Omaha Fair & Exposition Ass'n v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1894
- In re DunnNebraska Supreme Court · 1909
- Omaha & Republican Valley Railway Co. v. ClarkeNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.