Case ID: neb_55/html/0754-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Sullivan, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company v. George Kellogg.
    Filed September 23, 1898.
    No. 8169.
    Suit in Equity for New Trial in Action at Law: Dismissal: Jon be: Interest in Case: Witnesses. A rehearing- having been allowed in this case, the record is examined, and the conclusions announced in the former opinion adhered to.
    Rehearing oí case reported in 54 Neb. 138.
    
      Affirmed.
    
    
      J. W. JDeweese, F. E. Bishop, W. 8. Morían, and TP. P. Hall, for plaintiff in error.
    
      'A. J. 8hafer, 8. A. Bravo, and Stewart & Hunger, contra.
    
   Sullivan, J.

After having again carefully examined the record in this case, we see no reason for receding from the conclusions announced in the former opinion reported in 54 Neb. 138. The evidence is conflicting and, under a well established rule of practice, we are not warranted in interfering with the finding of the trial court, although we are inclined to think it should have found in favor of the railroad company. The judgment of the district court will stand

AFFIRMED.