Rieck v. Griffen
| Decision Date | 08 June 1905 |
| Parties | RIECK v. GRIFFEN. |
| Court | Nebraska Supreme Court |
1. Petition in the district court examined, and held not a departure from the issues tendered in the county court.
2. The public seal of another state affixed to a copy of a written law of that state is admissible as evidence of such law.
3. The unwritten law of another state may be proved by parol evidence.
4. Instructions examined, and held not prejudicial.
Commissioners' Opinion. Department No. 1. Error to District Court, Douglas County; Redick, Judge.
Action by Jenks N. Griffen against Henry F. Rieck. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. Affirmed.Chas. Battelle, for plaintiff in error.
Edson Rich and Stillman & Price, for defendant in error.
This was an action originally instituted in the county court of Douglas county, Neb., on the following duebill, or note of hand: Petition alleged that defendant had paid upon said note an amount duly indorsed thereon: “Received the sum of $171.05, being balance of purchase money after paying all costs, for which lands sold, this Oct. 27th, 1900.” The petition prayed judgment for the balance due on the note, with interest. The answer denied that plaintiff was the owner and the real party in interest in the note, and alleged that, if defendant signed the note, his signature was procured through fraud and misrepresentation of the plaintiff as to the nature and character of the instrument signed. The answer, for further defense, alleged that on the 10th day of April, 1900, the plaintiff, with one John Noe, as parties plaintiff, began an action in equity in Marion county, Ark., against the defendant, to foreclose a vendor's lien upon the premises for the unpaid purchase money; that, on constructive service on the defendant, said action was prosecuted to a final judgment, and the premises sold, and purchased by one R. L. Berry, to whom was issued a certificate of purchase, which was transferred to the plaintiff, J. N. Griffen; that the sale was confirmed and deed issued to said J. N. Griffen, who became thereupon the owner of said real estate. The answer also pleads a counterclaim for $800 of the purchase money advanced, and $150 alleged to have been given to the plaintiff for the purchase of options which plaintiff failed to make. Plaintiff, by way of reply to this answer, denied that any fraud had been practiced on the defendant in procuring his signature to the note in suit; admitted that an action had been prosecuted in Marion county, Ark., for the foreclosure of a vendor's lien, and pleaded the laws of the state of Arkansas, which authorized such action; denied that plaintiff was purchaser at the judicial sale, and admitted that he had purchased the certificate, for a valuable consideration, on which he had subsequently procured a deed to the premises. On the trial in the county court, defendant had a judgment, and the cause was removed by appeal to the district court of Douglas county, where, on a trial to the court and jury, plaintiff had a verdict and judgment for $594.51, and, to reverse this judgment, defendant brings error to this court.
The plaintiff filed a new petition in the district court, in which he alleged the entire transaction connected with the signing of the note, the proceeding to foreclose the vendor's lien, and the laws of Arkansas authorizing the petition. Defendant filed a motion to strike from the petition the allegations with reference to the laws of Arkansas and the foreclosure proceeding, as the...
To continue reading
Request your trial