McCarter v. Cover

Nebraska Supreme Court

McCarter v. Cover

241 N.W. 525, 122 Neb. 691, 1932 Neb. LEXIS 113

CourtNebraska Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 11, 1932

DocketNo. 28166

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 241 N.W. 525 (McCarter v. Cover) 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

McCarter v. Cover, 241 N.W. 525, 122 Neb. 691, 1932 Neb. LEXIS 113 (Neb. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Rose, J.

This is an action to recover the amount due on the claim that plaintiff sold to defendant a town lot in Lexington and was to receive in part payment the stock and fixtures of a bakery in Grand Island, including a truck valued at $275 and rent of $45.75 — two items of consideration never received. The prayer was for judgment in the sum of $320.75, with interest from May 18, 1930.

In an answer to the petition defendant put in issue the facts entitling plaintiff to relief and pleaded a counterclaim of $650 for breach of warranty in the deed to the Lexington lot for which the bakery in Grand Island had been accepted in part payment. The alleged breach of warranty consisted of encroachments of buildings extending beyond the boundary of an abutting lot. This claim was contested by plaintiff.

Before the district court without a jury, there were spirited trials which resulted in a judgment for $355.85 in favor of plaintiff for the price of the truck and the unpaid rent, and in a judgment for $445.08 in favor of •defendant on his counterclaim for breach of warranty. Defendant appealed from the judgment for $355.85.

The judgment from which the appeal was taken is challenged for assigned errors in rulings on evidence and for insufficiency of the evidence to justify the conclusion reached by the district court. All material evidence offered on either side was admitted during the trial. In an action at law tried to the court without a jury, the presumption on appeal is that competent evidence only was considered in the determination of the issues. The [693]*693entire record has been examined with care and it shows an abundance of competent evidence, to support the judgment. In such a case the findings have the same effect on appeal as the verdict of a jury. Prejudicial error has not been pointed out.

Affirmed.

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

Rose, J.

This is an action to recover the amount due on the claim that plaintiff sold to defendant a town lot in Lexington and was to receive in part payment the stock and fixtures of a bakery in Grand Island, including a truck valued at $275 and rent of $45.75 — two items of consideration never received. The prayer was for judgment in the sum of $320.75, with interest from May 18, 1930.

In an answer to the petition defendant put in issue the facts entitling plaintiff to relief and pleaded a counterclaim of $650 for breach of warranty in the deed to the Lexington lot for which the bakery in Grand Island had been accepted in part payment. The alleged breach of warranty consisted of encroachments of buildings extending beyond the boundary of an abutting lot. This claim was contested by plaintiff.

Before the district court without a jury, there were spirited trials which resulted in a judgment for $355.85 in favor of plaintiff for the price of the truck and the unpaid rent, and in a judgment for $445.08 in favor of •defendant on his counterclaim for breach of warranty. Defendant appealed from the judgment for $355.85.

The judgment from which the appeal was taken is challenged for assigned errors in rulings on evidence and for insufficiency of the evidence to justify the conclusion reached by the district court. All material evidence offered on either side was admitted during the trial. In an action at law tried to the court without a jury, the presumption on appeal is that competent evidence only was considered in the determination of the issues. The [693]*693entire record has been examined with care and it shows an abundance of competent evidence, to support the judgment. In such a case the findings have the same effect on appeal as the verdict of a jury. Prejudicial error has not been pointed out.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

241 N.W. 525, 122 Neb. 691, 1932 Neb. LEXIS 113, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccarter-v-cover-neb-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack