Village of Arlington v. Barothy

Nebraska Supreme Court

Village of Arlington v. Barothy

77 N.W. 52, 56 Neb. 656, 1898 Neb. LEXIS 289

CourtNebraska Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 17, 1898

DocketNo. 8455

StatusPublished

This text of 77 N.W. 52 (Village of Arlington v. Barothy) 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

Village of Arlington v. Barothy, 77 N.W. 52, 56 Neb. 656, 1898 Neb. LEXIS 289 (Neb. 1898).

Pincite

Opinion

Sullivan, J.

This action .was brought in the district court of Washington county to restrain the defendant Estelle Barothy from encroaching upon one of the public -streets of the village of Arlington. The trial resulted in a finding and judgment in favor of the -defendant. It is now claimed, on behalf of the village, that the conclusion and decree of the trial court are not -sustained by sufficient evidence, and that there was prejudicial error in the exclusion of certain testimony tendered by the plaintiff in support of [657]*657the allegations of its petition. These questions cannot be determined without the .aid of a bill of exceptions, and no such document is to be found in the record before us; neither is there .any allusion to it in the certificate of the clerk. Error does not. affirmatively appear and the judgment is, therefore,

Affirmed.

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

Sullivan, J.

This action .was brought in the district court of Washington county to restrain the defendant Estelle Barothy from encroaching upon one of the public -streets of the village of Arlington. The trial resulted in a finding and judgment in favor of the -defendant. It is now claimed, on behalf of the village, that the conclusion and decree of the trial court are not -sustained by sufficient evidence, and that there was prejudicial error in the exclusion of certain testimony tendered by the plaintiff in support of [657]*657the allegations of its petition. These questions cannot be determined without the .aid of a bill of exceptions, and no such document is to be found in the record before us; neither is there .any allusion to it in the certificate of the clerk. Error does not. affirmatively appear and the judgment is, therefore,

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

77 N.W. 52, 56 Neb. 656, 1898 Neb. LEXIS 289, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/village-of-arlington-v-barothy-neb-1898.