Biddle v. Jenkins

CourtSupreme Court of Nebraska
Writing for the CourtNORVAL
Citation85 N.W. 392,61 Neb. 400
Decision Date06 March 1901
PartiesBIDDLE v. JENKINS.

61 Neb. 400
85 N.W. 392

BIDDLE
v.
JENKINS.

Supreme Court of Nebraska.

March 6, 1901.



Syllabus by the Court.

1. The commissioners of insanity have cognizance not only of applications for admission to the hospital for the insane, but also for the safe-keeping otherwise of insane persons in their respective counties.

2. An affidavit filed with the commissioners of insanity, alleging that a person resident of their county is insane, and his being at large is dangerous to the community, confers jurisdiction upon the board to act.

3. Insanity cannot be established by proof of the reputation of the party in that regard.

4. The advice of counsel, to be of any avail, must have been given after a full and fair statement of all the facts within the knowledge of the person seeking the same, and must have been relied upon in good faith.


Error to district court, Clay county; Hastings, Judge.

Action by Sarah Biddle against Edward J. Jenkins. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error. Reversed.

[85 N.W. 392]

Chas. O. Whedon, for plaintiff in error.

J. L. Epperson, for defendant in error.


NORVAL, C. J.

Sarah Biddle sued defendant for false imprisonment and malicious prosecution. The cause of complaint was that defendant had theretofore falsely and maliciously, without probable or reasonable

[85 N.W. 393]

cause therefor, charged her, in an affidavit presented to the commissioners of insanity, with being insane. The affidavit was as follows: “State of Nebraska, Clay County--ss.: The undersigned, a citizen of Fairfield, Clay county, Nebraska, being sworn, says that he believes Sarah Biddle is insane; that her being at large is dangerous to the community. She has a legal settlement in said county. [Signed] E. J. Jenkins.” Said affidavit was sworn to before a competent officer. Upon it a warrant was duly issued, and she was arrested and deprived of her liberty, remaining in the custody of the sheriff for five days. On the hearing had, she was acquitted, and found not to be insane. She alleges that by reason of such imprisonment and prosecution she was injured in her credit and reputation, brought into public scandal, infamy, and disgrace, and suffered great bodily and mental anxiety and pain, and was forced to expend certain moneys in securing her discharge, and that by reason of the premises she was damaged in the sum of $5,000, for which sum she prayed judgment. Defendant's answer admitted the making of the affidavit, and that she was discharged, but denied that it was made falsely or maliciously, and alleged as a defense that at the time that he made the affidavit, and prior thereto, she had conducted herself in such a manner as would have induced a man of ordinary prudence and discretion to believe she was insane, and he so believed when he made the affidavit; that before making it he consulted creditable lawyers and a competent doctor, and to each of them made, in good faith, a full, true, and fair statement of the facts relative to the conduct of plaintiff, and, after hearing...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 practice notes
  • State ex rel. Beck v. Associates Discount Corp., No. 34398
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Nebraska
    • April 3, 1959
    ...lights, telephone, and stenographic, clerical, and miscellaneous help. In State v. Nebraska Savings & Exchange Bank, supra [61 Neb. 496, 85 N.W. 392], we said: 'The one question is whether the receipts and expenditures by the receiver are in accordance[168 Neb. 335] with the directions of t......
  • Toomey v. Tolin, No. 73--657
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • March 27, 1975
    ...Seaboard Oil Co. v. Cunningham, 51 F.2d 321 (5th Cir. 1931); Galarza v. Sprague, 284 Ill.App. 254, 1 N.E.2d 275 (1936); Biddle v. Jenkins, 61 Neb. 400, 85 N.W. 392 (1901); Price v. Cook, 120 Okl. 105, 250 P. 519 (1926); others hold to the contrary (see, e.g., Fire Ass'n v. Flemming, 78 Ga. ......
  • State v. Neb. Sav. & Exch. Bank
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • March 6, 1901
    ...of compensation of a receiver for his services is largely in the discretion of the trial court having charge of the receivership, [85 N.W. 392]and unless it is made to affirmatively appear that the amount allowed is erroneous, and there has been an abuse of discretion, the order of allowanc......
  • State v. Nebraska Savings & Exchange Bank, 11,882
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Nebraska
    • March 6, 1901
    ...AFFIRMED. William O. Bartholomew, for himself. Frank N. Prout, Attorney General, for the state. Silas Cobb, for the receiver. OPINION [85 N.W. 392] HOLCOMB, J. From an order approving and confirming a report of the receiver in the matter of winding up the affairs of the Nebraska Savings & E......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • State ex rel. Beck v. Associates Discount Corp., No. 34398
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Nebraska
    • April 3, 1959
    ...lights, telephone, and stenographic, clerical, and miscellaneous help. In State v. Nebraska Savings & Exchange Bank, supra [61 Neb. 496, 85 N.W. 392], we said: 'The one question is whether the receipts and expenditures by the receiver are in accordance[168 Neb. 335] with the directions of t......
  • Toomey v. Tolin, No. 73--657
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • March 27, 1975
    ...Seaboard Oil Co. v. Cunningham, 51 F.2d 321 (5th Cir. 1931); Galarza v. Sprague, 284 Ill.App. 254, 1 N.E.2d 275 (1936); Biddle v. Jenkins, 61 Neb. 400, 85 N.W. 392 (1901); Price v. Cook, 120 Okl. 105, 250 P. 519 (1926); others hold to the contrary (see, e.g., Fire Ass'n v. Flemming, 78 Ga. ......
  • State v. Neb. Sav. & Exch. Bank
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • March 6, 1901
    ...of compensation of a receiver for his services is largely in the discretion of the trial court having charge of the receivership, [85 N.W. 392]and unless it is made to affirmatively appear that the amount allowed is erroneous, and there has been an abuse of discretion, the order of allowanc......
  • State v. Nebraska Savings & Exchange Bank, 11,882
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Nebraska
    • March 6, 1901
    ...AFFIRMED. William O. Bartholomew, for himself. Frank N. Prout, Attorney General, for the state. Silas Cobb, for the receiver. OPINION [85 N.W. 392] HOLCOMB, J. From an order approving and confirming a report of the receiver in the matter of winding up the affairs of the Nebraska Savings & E......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT