Meyer v. Fagan

Decision Date09 March 1892
PartiesMEYER ET AL. v. FAGAN.
CourtNebraska Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Syllabus by the Court.

1. Where a motion was made to quash the bill of exceptions because not presented to and signed by the judge within the time fixed by law, it appeared that the bill had been presented to one of the attorneys for the defendant in error within the time fixed by statute, that such attorney had retained the bill for a long time, and that the delay in presenting the bill to the judge for his signature was caused by such attorney retaining the bill. Held, that such default could not be assigned as a reason for quashing the bill, and that the motion would be overruled.

2. Where, from the issue made by the pleadings, it is, in effect, admitted that an attachment was wrongfully sued out and levied on the debtor's stock of goods, although they were not removed from the store, such debtor, after the dissolution of the attachment, will be entitled to damages for injury to his business and credit; and a verdict for $350, upon the evidence in the record, will not be set aside.

Error to district court, Greeley county; TIFFANY, Judge.

Action by T. J. Fagan against Meyer & Raapke, S. M. Anderson, E. Woodworth, and S. Wilson on an attachment bond. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff. Defendants bring error. Affirmed.H. G. Bell, Cavanagh & Thomas, and Lamb, Ricketts & Wilson, for plaintiffs in error.

T. J. Doyle, for defendant in error.

MAXWELL, C. J.

This action was brought by the defendant in error against the plaintiffs in error to recover $525 upon an undertaking for an attachment, which attachment had been issued without sufficient cause and had been dissolved. In the answer the defendants below admit the issuing and levy of the attachment and its dissolution, but deny that the goods were taken possession of by the officers, and deny any injury to the defendant in error or to his business standing. On the trial of the cause the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant in error for the sum of $350, upon which judgment was rendered. A motion is made to quash the bill of exceptions for various reasons,--among others, that the bill was not presented to the trial judge for his signature until after the expiration of the time fixed by law, and was not filed in the office of the clerk of the district court.

It appears from the record that the bill was sent within the time fixed by law to one of the attorneys of the defendant in error for...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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