State ex rel. Levy v. Spicer

54 N.W. 849, 36 Neb. 469, 1893 Neb. LEXIS 94
CourtNebraska Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 29, 1893
DocketNo. 4979
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 54 N.W. 849 (State ex rel. Levy v. Spicer) 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
State ex rel. Levy v. Spicer, 54 N.W. 849, 36 Neb. 469, 1893 Neb. LEXIS 94 (Neb. 1893).

Opinion

Maxwell, Ch. J.

The defendant is the clerk of the district court of Adams county, and this is an application for a mandamus to compel him to pay over certain moneys in his hands claimed to be due the relator. He has demurred to the petition upon two grounds: First, that the action is improperly brought in the name of the state, and second, that the facts stated in the petition are not sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The petition is as follows:

“Comes now the relator, Mark Levy, and respectfully represents unto this honorable court that on May 24, 1888, Loeb and Emile Lindner commenced in the district court of Adams county, Nebraska, by the filing of their petition, an action for partition of divers and sundry descriptions of real estate mentioned in their said petition; that Rosa Hirsch, Harry Hirsch, Benjamin Hirsch, and Jacob Hirsch were defendants in said action; that Rosa Hirsch was the wife, and the said Harry, Benjamin, and Jacob Hirsch were the only heirs and children of Samuel Hirsch, deceased, who died intestate in the city of Hastings, Adams county, Nebraska, on the 18th day of April, 1888; that on the 16th day of June, 1888, John M. Ragan was duly appointed by said court as guardian ad litem for the said Harry, Benjamin, and Jacob Hirsch, the minor heirs of said Samuel Hirsch, deceased; that on the 18th day of June, 1888, said action came on to be heard upon the said petition and the answer by Rosa Hirsch in her own proper person, and the answer of John M. Ragan, the duly appointed guardian ad litem of said minors, and the evidence presented in open court, and the same was submitted to said court. On consideration whereof the court found that the plaintiff Abraham Loeb was the owner in fee-simple of an undivided one-half (½) part and interest to the real estate described in said petition, and that said Harry, Benjamin, and Jacob Hirsch were the children of Samuel Hirsch, late [471]*471of said county, deceased, and as his heirs are each the owner in fee-simple of one-sixth (⅙) part of the real estate described in said petition; that it was further ordered and adjudged by the said court at said time that said shares of each of said parties interested in the real estate described in said petition and said decree be and the same was thereby confirmed, and it was adjudged therein that said partition be made accordingly, if an equitable division thereof could be effected without detriment to the persons interested therein.

“It was further ordered and adjudged in said district court that J. H. Graham, William M. Lowman, and J. D, Croswaith be, and they were thereby, appointed referees to make partition of said real estate into the requisite number of.shares, and report the same at that term of court if possible, and if not, that they make due report at the following term of said court.

“That on the 19th day of June, 1888, a commission authorizing and requiring the referees to carry into effect the terms and requirements of said decree was issued out of the district court of Adams county, Nebraska, authorizing-and commanding-them to make partition of said real estate as follows:

“ To Abraham Loeb one-half (½) in value of said real estate; to Harry, Benjamin, and Jacob Hirsch, severally, one-sixth (⅙) each in value of said real estate, in manner as provided by law.

“ That on said day said referees took the oath prescribed by law, as fully appears upon said commission; that on the 20th day of June, 1888, said referees, having first took the oath required by law as hereinbefore related, carefully examined the condition of all the real estate described in said petition with a view to making partition thereof among the persons hereinbefore named, and said referees reported and found that the partition of said premises could not be made without great prejudice to the owners thereof, for the rea[472]*472son that it would divide the land and town lots therein specified into small parts which would be worthless, and further, that said partition could not be made on account of incumbrances. thereon; that on the 22d day of June, 1888, said cause came on to be heard upon the report of the referees in said action and a motion to confirm the same and it appearing to said court that said partition of the real estate mentioned in said petition could not be made without prejudice to the owners thereof, and said court being satisfied of the- truth thereof, said report was by the order of the said court entered upon the records thereof; and it was further ordered and adjudged by the court at said time and in said order that said referees should proceed to sell said premises described in said petition at public sale after giving due and legal notice thereto as required upon sales under execution. Said sales of said real estate were ordered to be held after the giving of legal notice thereof:. The Adams county land, at the frontdoor of the court house in Adams county, Nebraska; the Kearney county land, at the front door of the court house in Kearney county, Nebraska; the Red "Willow county real estate, at the front door of the court house in Indianola; and the land situated in Brown county, at the front door of the court house in the town of Ainsworth therein. It was further ordered in said decree that said sales should be for one-third cash in hand, one-third in one year, and one-third in two years, with approved security upon all deferred payments, with interest at the rate of eight per cent per annum until the same be paid. Said referees were further ordered to report their doings relative to the sale of said real estate.

“ That thereupon said referees proceeded to the procurement of certificates to all liens upon the real estate described in said petition and caused all of the same to be duly advertised according to the terms of the decree of the said court; and said referees made report of all of their doings at stated periods; that all of the reports of sales made by [473]*473said referees were presented to said court for examination and the same were in each and every instance, upon careful examination and consideration of said court, found to be in all respects conducted according to law, and said sales were by said court in each and every instance confirmed, and said referees were ordered to execute and deliver to the purchasers at the said sales deeds for the real estate so purchased by them; that all of the real estate described in said petition was sold by said referees and deeds conveying said premises to the purchasers thereof in fee-simple were duly executed by them and delivered to the purchasers thereof; that the proceedings and confirmation of all said sales were duly certified to and placed of record in the county where said real estate so sold is situated.

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

Related

State Ex Rel. Krieger v. Board of Supervisors
105 N.W.2d 721 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1960)
Flanigan v. Burritt
173 P. 352 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1918)
State ex rel. Kelley v. Ferguson
144 N.W. 1039 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1914)
State ex rel. Weinberg v. Pacific Brewing & Malting Co.
58 P. 584 (Washington Supreme Court, 1899)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
54 N.W. 849, 36 Neb. 469, 1893 Neb. LEXIS 94, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-levy-v-spicer-neb-1893.