DeKlotz v. Hyers

Nebraska Supreme Court

DeKlotz v. Hyers

98 Neb. 140

CourtNebraska Supreme Court

DecidedApril 3, 1915

DocketNo. 18391

StatusPublished

This text of 98 Neb. 140 (DeKlotz v. Hyers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

DeKlotz v. Hyers, 98 Neb. 140 (Neb. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Letton, J.

The facts in this case are similar to those in In re Arrigo, ante, p. 134, except that the package was properly labeled to show it contained cocoa, and on one side in small type the words, “Save the Hamilton Coupon in This Package,” were printed on the label. A printed slip or coupon was packed with the food in the can or package, stating that the coupon would be accepted by the Hamilton corporation in exchange for certain goods.

For the reasons set forth in the Arrigo case, the judgment of the district court is

Reversed.

Barnes, J., dissents.

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

Letton, J.

The facts in this case are similar to those in In re Arrigo, ante, p. 134, except that the package was properly labeled to show it contained cocoa, and on one side in small type the words, “Save the Hamilton Coupon in This Package,” were printed on the label. A printed slip or coupon was packed with the food in the can or package, stating that the coupon would be accepted by the Hamilton corporation in exchange for certain goods.

For the reasons set forth in the Arrigo case, the judgment of the district court is

Reversed.

Barnes, J., dissents.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

98 Neb. 140, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/deklotz-v-hyers-neb-1915.