Petersen v. Mannix

CourtSupreme Court of Nebraska
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM.
Citation2 Neb. [Unof.] 795,90 N.W. 210
PartiesPETERSEN ET AL. v. MANNIX.
Decision Date17 April 1902

2 Neb. [Unof.] 795
90 N.W. 210

PETERSEN ET AL.
v.
MANNIX.

Supreme Court of Nebraska.

April 17, 1902.


Commissioners' opinion. Department No. 2. Error to district court, Pierce county; Allen, Judge.

“Not to be officially reported.”

Action by P. H. Petersen and others against James E. Mannix. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiffs bring error. Affirmed.

[90 N.W. 210]

O. J. Frost, for plaintiffs in error.

G. T. Kelley, for defendant in error.


POUND, C.

This action was brought originally in justice's court to recover $17.80 on an account for job printing, advertising, and subscription to a newspaper, amounting to $5.80, and a further claim for $12, assigned to plaintiffs by one Ella Frost. The defendant offered in writing to confess judgment for $1.50. Two trials were had to a jury in justice's court before a verdict and judgment could be had. Error was then prosecuted to the district court, where the judgment rendered by the justice of the peace was reversed, and the cause retained for trial and again tried to a jury. This trial resulted in a verdict and judgment in plaintiffs' favor for $1.50, from which error is now prosecuted.

The assignments of error chiefly relied on relate to an order of the district court striking certain allegations as to interest out of the petition. The allegations in question set up that 18 cents interest was due upon one item sued on, and 10 cents interest upon another. This sum of 28 cents, which the plaintiffs maintain they were entitled to by way of interest, comes about as near to the “little diachylon,” which, according to Lord Holt, the common law will duly save to parties litigant, as could well be anticipated in a cause tried to three juries and of sufficient interest to the parties to justify bringing to this court. But the constitution has solemnly promised that the right to be heard in the supreme court by error or appeal shall not be denied, and, so long as anything is in controversy, it is our duty to wrestle with the questions of law presented without regard to mere accidents of substance or value. Approaching these assignments of error, therefore, with due gravity and a high sense of the importance of the principle involved, we are of opinion that the rulings complained of were without prejudice. Interest was not claimed by virtue of any contract or agreement to pay it, but by reason of section 4, c. 44, Comp. St. Hence we do not understand that any express allegations that interest was due were required. A...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 practice notes
  • City of Rawlins v. Jungquist
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • 21 Marzo 1908
    ...is made therefor in the bill or declaration. (Lane v. Cluckauf, 27 Am. Dec., 121; Stanley v. Anderson, 65 N.W. 247; Peterson v. Mannix, 90 N.W. 210; Whitaker v. Pope, 29 F. C. No. 17528; 2 Abb. Tr Br. Pl., 1743; R. Co. v. Greathouse, 17 S.W. 834; Porter v. Russeck, 29 S.W. 72; 44 S.W. 550.)......
  • Calnon v. Fidelity-Phenix Fire Ins. Co., No. 23370.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Nebraska
    • 30 Diciembre 1925
    ...by law, entitled to the sum of $12,000 with interest from January 10, 1922, to November 23, 1922. Peterson v. Mannix, 2 Neb. (Unof.) 795, 90 N. W. 210;Estate of Bennett v. Taylor, 4 Neb. (Unof.) 800, 96 N. W. 669. Upon presentation of the motion to include interest, the court was empowered ......
  • Calnon v. Fidelity-Phenix Fire Ins. Company, 23370
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Nebraska
    • 30 Diciembre 1925
    ...the plaintiff was, by law, entitled to the sum of $ 12,000, with interest from January 10, 1922, to November 23, 1922. Peterson v. Mannix, 90 N.W. 210, 2 Neb. Unoff. 795; Estate of Bennett v. Taylor, 96 N.W. 669, 4 Neb. Unoff. 800. Upon presentation of the motion to include interest, the co......
  • Fremont County, Iowa v. Fremont County Bank
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • 16 Diciembre 1909
    ...such damages as result necessarily from the breach of contract need not be specifically laid. In Peterson v. Mannix, 2 Neb. Unoff. 795 (90 N.W. 210), the court observed that "A plaintiff may recover interest upon debts or claims which, without any contract therefor, bear interest as a matte......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
7 cases
  • City of Rawlins v. Jungquist
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • 21 Marzo 1908
    ...is made therefor in the bill or declaration. (Lane v. Cluckauf, 27 Am. Dec., 121; Stanley v. Anderson, 65 N.W. 247; Peterson v. Mannix, 90 N.W. 210; Whitaker v. Pope, 29 F. C. No. 17528; 2 Abb. Tr Br. Pl., 1743; R. Co. v. Greathouse, 17 S.W. 834; Porter v. Russeck, 29 S.W. 72; 44 S.W. 550.)......
  • Calnon v. Fidelity-Phenix Fire Ins. Co., No. 23370.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Nebraska
    • 30 Diciembre 1925
    ...by law, entitled to the sum of $12,000 with interest from January 10, 1922, to November 23, 1922. Peterson v. Mannix, 2 Neb. (Unof.) 795, 90 N. W. 210;Estate of Bennett v. Taylor, 4 Neb. (Unof.) 800, 96 N. W. 669. Upon presentation of the motion to include interest, the court was empowered ......
  • Calnon v. Fidelity-Phenix Fire Ins. Company, 23370
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Nebraska
    • 30 Diciembre 1925
    ...the plaintiff was, by law, entitled to the sum of $ 12,000, with interest from January 10, 1922, to November 23, 1922. Peterson v. Mannix, 90 N.W. 210, 2 Neb. Unoff. 795; Estate of Bennett v. Taylor, 96 N.W. 669, 4 Neb. Unoff. 800. Upon presentation of the motion to include interest, the co......
  • Fremont County, Iowa v. Fremont County Bank
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • 16 Diciembre 1909
    ...such damages as result necessarily from the breach of contract need not be specifically laid. In Peterson v. Mannix, 2 Neb. Unoff. 795 (90 N.W. 210), the court observed that "A plaintiff may recover interest upon debts or claims which, without any contract therefor, bear interest as a matte......
  • 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