Paper v. Galbreth
| Decision Date | 21 October 1932 |
| Docket Number | 28263 |
| Citation | 244 N.W. 896,123 Neb. 841 |
| Parties | NICK PAPER, APPELLANT, v. J. L. GALBRETH, APPELLEE |
| Court | Nebraska Supreme Court |
APPEAL from the district court for Nuckolls county: ROBERT M PROUDFIT, JUDGE. Dismissed.
Appeal dismissed.
Syllabus by the Court.
Where the bond is not filed within three months, as provided in section 20-1914, Comp. St. 1929, no appeal will be allowed in this court.
Appeal from District Court, Nuckolls County; Proudfit, Judge.
Action by Nick Paper against J. L. Galbreth. Judgment in favor of the defendant, and the plaintiff appeals.
Appeal dismissed.
Burkett Wilson, Brown, Wilson & Van Kirk, for appellant.
Bernard McNeny, J. S. Gilham and L. A. Sprague, contra.
Heard before ROSE, DEAN, GOOD, EBERLY, DAY and PAINE, JJ.
An action was instituted by Nick Paper in the district court for Nuckolls county to recover on certain promissory notes given in payment of a biophone reproducer, sold to J. L. Galbreth who conducts a picture show business at Superior, Nebraska.
The suit was for the balance due and unpaid on the purchase price of $ 2,500. Deceit and misrepresentations were set out in the answer, which the jury must have believed were fully proved by the evidence, as the jury denied the plaintiff relief and returned a verdict for $ 1,420.59 against him. An appeal therefrom was taken to this court by the plaintiff.
The case has been before this court a number of times. In the first trial in the district court, the trial judge instructed the jury to return a verdict against the defendant. Upon appeal to this court, an opinion by Chief Justice Goss was released June 29, 1931, which set out all of the material facts involved in the case and reversed the judgment of the district court and remanded the cause for a new trial, which opinion is found in 121 Neb. 454. A new trial was had in the district court, beginning October 29, 1931, at the conclusion of which the jury returned a verdict for the defendant in the sum of $ 1,420.59, and upon January 19, 1932, transcript thereof was filed in this court. Upon March 9, 1932, argument was made to this court, asking this court to dismiss the appeal on the ground that no cost bond had been filed within 90 days, as provided by section 20-1914, Comp. St. 1929, and this motion was by this court sustained. Thereafter, upon April 16, 1932, the above order, sustaining said motion, was vacated, and appellant was allowed to file a bond, and briefs were filed and said case was argued at length to this court upon October 5, 1932, at...
To continue reading
Request your trial