Grant v. Clarke

78 N.W. 364, 58 Neb. 72, 1899 Neb. LEXIS 103
CourtNebraska Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 23, 1899
DocketNo. 8761
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 78 N.W. 364 (Grant v. Clarke) 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
Grant v. Clarke, 78 N.W. 364, 58 Neb. 72, 1899 Neb. LEXIS 103 (Neb. 1899).

Opinion

Ryan, C.

In the district court of Douglas county this action was instituted by George M. Grant for the foreclosure of a mortgage securing two promissory notes. The payee of these notes, and the mortgagee, was Martha M. Ish. In his petition plaintiff alleged that by the indorsement of Martha M. Ish and the indorsement of H. Ambler plaintiff had become the owner of said notes and entitled to foreclose the mortgage securing the same. By their answers Walter and Minnie Moise and Anton and Mary Larsen denied the averments of the petition in such a manner that the execution of the assignments aforesaid were put in issue. The notes and mortgage were offered in evidence, but there was no offer of the alleged indorsements, and therefore there was no proof made' of the assignments through which plaintiff claimed title to the notes and the right to maintain an action of foreclosure on the mortgage securing them. (Noll v. Kenneally, 37 Neb. 879; Cummins v. Vandeventer, 52 Neb. 478; Johnson v. English, 53 Neb. 530; Levy v. Cunningham, 56 Neb. 348; Comstock v. Kerwin, 57 Neb. 1.)

As against the parties who had put in issue the alleged assignments the decree lacked sufficient evidence to support it, and accordingly the judgment adverse to the appellants Walter and Minnie Moise and Anton and Mary [74]*74Larsen is' reversed. Frank N. Clarke made default in the district court, and because of this fact all averments of the petition were properly taken as true, except as to the amount of the recovery (Code of Civil Procedure, sec. 134), and the proof on this point was supplied by the introduction of the notes. Mr. Clarke is, therefore, not entitled to a reversal, but as to the other appellants the judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Related

State of Fla. v. COUNTRYWIDE TRUCK INS. AGCY.
602 N.W.2d 432 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1999)
Pitman v. Heumeier
115 N.W. 1083 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1908)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
78 N.W. 364, 58 Neb. 72, 1899 Neb. LEXIS 103, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grant-v-clarke-neb-1899.