Noble v. Neal

Nebraska Supreme Court

Noble v. Neal

78 N.W. 383, 57 Neb. 797, 1899 Neb. LEXIS 97

CourtNebraska Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 23, 1899

DocketNo. 8763

StatusPublished

This text of 78 N.W. 383 (Noble v. Neal) 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

Noble v. Neal, 78 N.W. 383, 57 Neb. 797, 1899 Neb. LEXIS 97 (Neb. 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

Harrison, O. J.

In this, an error proceeding, in which the reversal of the judgment of the district court of Pierce county is asked, it is argued that the verdict of the jury before which the cause was tried was contrary to, or not sustained by, the evidence; also, that the trial court erred in giving certain designated instructions to the jury. The determination of any of the points presented would necessitate an examination and consideration of the evidence introduced on the trial. There is in the record a document which purports to be the bill of exceptions, but it lacks the authentication by the clerk of the trial court, and cannot be considered (Hale v. Sheehan, 52 Neb. 184), and the questions which call for an examination of the evidence must be disregarded. (Aitken v. Rawlings, 52 Neb. 589.) It follows that the arguments herein are without avail, and the judgment must be

Affirmed.

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

Harrison, O. J.

In this, an error proceeding, in which the reversal of the judgment of the district court of Pierce county is asked, it is argued that the verdict of the jury before which the cause was tried was contrary to, or not sustained by, the evidence; also, that the trial court erred in giving certain designated instructions to the jury. The determination of any of the points presented would necessitate an examination and consideration of the evidence introduced on the trial. There is in the record a document which purports to be the bill of exceptions, but it lacks the authentication by the clerk of the trial court, and cannot be considered (Hale v. Sheehan, 52 Neb. 184), and the questions which call for an examination of the evidence must be disregarded. (Aitken v. Rawlings, 52 Neb. 589.) It follows that the arguments herein are without avail, and the judgment must be

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

78 N.W. 383, 57 Neb. 797, 1899 Neb. LEXIS 97, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/noble-v-neal-neb-1899.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack