White v. Rourke
Citation | 9 N.W. 689,11 Neb. 519 |
Parties | O. W. WHITE, APPELLEE, v. JOHN O. ROURKE AND OTHERS, APPELLANTS |
Decision Date | 01 July 1881 |
Court | Supreme Court of Nebraska |
APPEAL from Cass county. Tried below before POUND, J.
AFFIRMED.
M Hartigan, for appellants.
W. S Wise and A. W. Crites, for appellees.
This is an action of foreclosure based upon a prom issory note, of which the following is a copy:
"In presence of D. H. Wheeler."
On the 31st of August, 1880, the plaintiff filed a petition in the district court of Cass county, in which he alleges that at the date of the note, the makers thereof, to secure the payment of the same, executed a mortgage upon lots 7 and 8, in block No. 12, in the city of Plattsmouth, which mortgage was duly recorded on the 2d day of January, 1877; that on the 14th day of May, 1880, said note and mortgage were duly assigned to the plaintiff, and that on the 14th day of July, 1880, Ellen McGuire and M. McGuire conveyed the real estate in question to the defendants. The action was dismissed as to the McGuires, and the defendants herein failing to answer, a decree of foreclosure for the sum of $ 516.93 and costs, and $ 50 attorney's fees, was rendered by default. The defendants appeal to this court.
The principal cause of complaint is the allowance of the attorney's fee. The act to provide for the allowance and recovery of an attorney's fee in certain actions, approved February 18, 1873, provided for the allowance of an attorney's fee not exceeding ten per cent in cases wherein the mortgage or other written instrument upon which the action was brought, contained an express provision for such allowance. This act was repealed June 1, 1879, but the repeal did not affect contracts entered into prior to that time, and after the act of February 18, 1873, took effect.
The defendants claim as purchasers of the mortgaged premises without notice of the provision for an attorney's fee, as it is alleged that that provision is...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Smith v. Fremont Contract Carriers, Inc.
...the contrary, resolved that conflict by simply saying, 98 Neb. at 868, 155 N.W. at 237: If these decisions are inconsistent with White v. Rourke, 11 Neb. 519 and Bond v. Dolby, 17 Neb. 491 , and other cases following them, we do not feel at liberty to disregard the later cases, and must the......
-
Thompson v. West
...v. Beverly, 163 U.S. 118; State v. City of Kearney, 49 Neb. 325; Bishop, Contracts, sec. 565; Jackson v. Creighton, 29 Neb. 310; White v. Rourke, 11 Neb. 519; v. Clarke, 25 Neb. 250; State v. McPeak, 31 Neb. 139. Counsel argued that the decisions of this court were numerous in which it had ......
-
Nye-Schneider-Fowler Co. v. Bridges, Hoye & Co.
...1873 provided for the allowance and recovery of attorney's fees in certain actions. This statute was repealed in 1879. In White v. Rourke, 11 Neb. 519, 9 N. W. 689, it was held that “the repeal did not affect contracts entered into prior to” the repeal; and in Bond v. Dolby, 17 Neb. 491, 23......
-
Bedford v. Ruby
...The presumptions are all in favor of the regularity of the proceedings of the district court. Error must affirmatively appear. White v. Rourke, 11 Neb. 519;S. C. 9 N. W. REP. 689;Roehl v. Roehl, 15 Neb. 655;S. C. 19 N. W. REP. 632;Stevenson v. Anderson, 12 Neb. 86; S. C. 10 N. W. REP. 552;D......