Nebraska advertiser., 1878-03-28
Cases Disposed of in the District
Court.

a synopsis OF several cases OF interest,"
to our readers.
In the case of Wineland against
Cochran ct al, the case was dismissed
at plaintiffs cost. Motion for q new
trial over-ruled-plaintiff excepts.
Hawk of Nebraska City against
Thomas Higgins. Mitchell for Hawk
Broadly for Higgins. Court found is
sues in favor of defendant. Motion
for new trial overruled, to which
plaintiff excerpts.
Umensetter against Umensetter.
Suit for divorce. Suit dismissed at
her costs.
Frances II. Karn against Isaiah
Karn. Broadly for plaintiff and Rog-
ers for defendant. Suit for divorce.
This was deplorable suit, between a
young husband and wife, with two
pretty children one and three years
Old. The parties had not been sepa-
rated sufficient length of time to
maintain plea of abandonment, but
that of extreme cruelty of the hus-
band was found to be sufficient. The
principal cruelty consisted in the hus-
band, when he left, tearing the little
girl from her mother, and hiding her
so that for four or five months the
mother did not know where her dar
ling was, nor what had become of her.
The Judge held that the mental an
guish of a mother under such circum-
stances was extreme cruelty sufficient
to Justify the granting of divorce,
and we think the decision humane
aud just. The judgment of the court
was that the divorce be granted as
prayed for-that the mother have the
custody of the children, that the IA
ther pay for their maintenance alli-
mOny as follows: Fifty dollars to be
paid within thirty days from the date
of the judgment, $50 more within
sixty days, and 500 each and every
year during the minority of the chill
dreu, to be paid September first
When the decision of the Judge had
been given, a slight demonstration,
such as hand shaking and pleasant
smiles were INDUCED in by the friends
of the lady.
The State. upon the relation of
Mary f. Rees against VIM. Drain.
Suit for bastardy. The defendent ap.
peared and entered the plea of guilty,
and confessed the accusation of the
complaint to be true. Therefore it
was decreed by the court that Drain
be charged with the maintenance of
the child, and pay to Mary S65 each
and every year during the minority
of the child $50 to be paid on the 1st
of May and S35 on the lst' of October
of each year; and that Drain enter
into good and sufficient bonds to the
commissioners of Nemaha in the sum
of 81 200 with such sufficient security
as may be approved by the clerk of
the court, for the faithful performance
of the order of the court.
Miss Mary Frisby against Samuel
Gilliland. Suit for basterdE. Thorn
as for plaintiff, Rogers for defendant.
This case was tried Saturday, and the
jury being out until midnight, could
not agree and were discharged with
out arriving at verdict. 1t seemed
TO us that it ought to have been de-
cided in ten minutes in favor of the
defendant. Mary's testimony, though
positive as to the paternity of the
child, was improbable, unreasonable,
illogical and entirely "too thin"
Mary Grant against Wentel Grant.
Suit for divorce. Cause. abandon
ment. Decree granted as prayed for
in petition.
Horace Bagley against Lucretia P.
Bagley. Suit for divorce. Cause,
Abandonment. Decree granted as
prayed for in petition.
State against VIM. Stevens. Prose
cution for selling intoxicating liquor
to a minor. Suit on appeal from Co.
court. Suit dismissed each party
paying half of the costs.
State against Gotlieb Mahle. Pros
ecutiOn for living in open adultery
with Mary Frisby. Jury found the
defendant not guilty.
State against Elizabeth Allen and
her son Frank. On indictment for
administering poison to her husband,
Clark Allen, deceased. Case contin-
ued. Why this case is continued so
often we cannot say, but hope to he
able to say, sometime.
In the case of Cheney VS.. Eberhardt
the defendantset up the plea of usury.
The facts proved were that Cheny as
agent for the lender of money, having
the money in his hands to loan, ex-
acted usurious rates of interest and |
large commissions taking a separate
note and mortgage to himself to Sc
cure the excessive interest and charg-
es. This note and mortgage were held
void. The court followed the decis-
ion of the Supreme Court in Cheney
VS.. Woodruff, reported in Neb. Isl.
In the cases Zingler VS.. Helmer and
Gutzmer defendants claimed titles to
the real estate In question through
tax deed taken by their grantor. The
plaintiff objected to the tax title on
the ground: l, that the oath of the as
SCISSOR was not attached to his return
of the real estate assessed, although it
was attached to the return of personal
2, that the party buying
the lands at tax sale was agent of the
owner to pay taxes with funds pro-
vided; 8, that the Treasurer made no
return to the County Clerk of the
public land sale upon which his juris-
1iction to sell at private sale depend
ed. The court found for the plaintiff 1
hoIdipn tho fov fitla bo6 =