Osborn v. Shotwell
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error to the district court for Lancaster county. Tried below before Field, J. cited, contending that a bill of exceptions was not necessary: Belcher v. Skinner, 28 Neb., 91; Freeman v. Burks, 16 Id., 328; Cook v. Hester, 21 Id., 369; TJ.
Read the full summary
Error to the district court for Lancaster county. Tried below before Field, J. cited, contending that a bill of exceptions was not necessary: Belcher v. Skinner, 28 Neb., 91; Freeman v. Burks, 16 Id., 328; Cook v. Hester, 21 Id., 369; TJ. P. B. Co. v. Smersh, 22 Id., 751. cited: Change of venue; Maxwell’s Justice Prac., 49 ; Bank of Cleveland v. Ward, 11 O., 128 ; Davis v. Rivers, 49 la., 435; Hall v. Barnes, 82 111., 228 ; Sloan v. Smith, 3 Cal., 410; People v. Wright, 5 How. Pr. [N. Y.], 23.
1Opinion of the CourtMaxwell, J.
This is an action of forcible entry and detention. On the trial of the cause before the justice, judgment was rendered in favor of the defendant in error. The case was taken on error to the district court, where the judgment of the justice was affirmed. The transcript of the justice is as follows :
“September 9, 1889, plaintiff filed the following complaint :
“'The plaintiff complains of the defendant for that one Win. L. Minthing was in his lifetime the owner of the N. E. J of section 27, in township 12, range 7, in Lancaster county, Neb-, and that this plaintiff is the- administrator of his…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Trobough v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1930
- Paul v. ZiebellNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
- Peyton v. JohnsonNebraska Supreme Court · 1893