Howard v. Lamaster

13 Neb. 221
CourtNebraska Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 15, 1882
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 13 Neb. 221 (Howard v. Lamaster) 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
Howard v. Lamaster, 13 Neb. 221 (Neb. 1882).

Opinion

By the Court.

This is a motion to quash a bill of exceptions upon the ground that the bill was not submitted to the adverse party for examination and amendment before it was signed by the judge. There is no receipt or other evidence in the record tending to show that the bill was ever submitted to the defendant in error, or his attorneys, and Mr. Ricketts has filed an affidavit denying specifically that such bill was ever submitted to him or the defendant. To offset this, one of the plaintiff’s attorneys has filed an affidavit, wherein he denies the truth of that of the attorney for the defendant, but fails to state any facte showing where or to whom he delivered the bill for examination. An affidavit, like a pleading, must state facts, and not mere conclusions of law — that is, the affiant must state the time and manner of performance. Unless the bill was submitted to the adverse party for examination and amendment, the judge had no authority to sign the same. Uhling v. Schellenberg, 12 Neb., 609. The object of the statute in requiring it to be thus submitted to the adverse party is to obtain an accurate bill.

The motion to quash must be sustained.

Motion sustained.

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

Related

Lancaster County Bank v. Gililian
49 Neb. 165 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1896)
Rhodes v. Thomas
48 N.W. 886 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1891)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
13 Neb. 221, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/howard-v-lamaster-neb-1882.