Cross v. Prohaska

Nebraska Supreme Court

Cross v. Prohaska

170 N.W. 665, 103 Neb. 146, 1919 Neb. LEXIS 15

Nebraska Supreme Court·Decided February 1, 1919·No. No. 20336·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Rose, J.

This is an action to recover a commission of $500 for the sale of land. From a judgment on a verdict in favor of defendants, plaintiff has appealed.

The assignments of error are based on misconduct of a witness and of the jury. The evidence has not been preserved by a bill of exceptions, and without the evidence the merits of the assignments cannot be determined. What purports to be a bill of exceptions was filed in this court, but it was not allowed as [147]*147such by the trial judge or authenticated by the clerk of the district court. It must therefore he disregarded on appeal. Dugger v. Smith, 94 Neb. 552; Gay v. Reynolds, 57 Neb. 194.

Apeirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Rose, J.

This is an action to recover a commission of $500 for the sale of land. From a judgment on a verdict in favor of defendants, plaintiff has appealed.

The assignments of error are based on misconduct of a witness and of the jury. The evidence has not been preserved by a bill of exceptions, and without the evidence the merits of the assignments cannot be determined. What purports to be a bill of exceptions was filed in this court, but it was not allowed as [147]*147such by the trial judge or authenticated by the clerk of the district court. It must therefore he disregarded on appeal. Dugger v. Smith, 94 Neb. 552; Gay v. Reynolds, 57 Neb. 194.

Apeirmed.

Cross v. Prohaska, 170 N.W. 665, 103 Neb. 146, 1919 Neb. LEXIS 15 (Neb. 1919).

Pincite

170 N.W. 665 (Cross v. Prohaska) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related