Omaha daily bee., 1885-02-27
Supreme Court, Nebraska, February
81. 1885,

Whitman We. State. Error from Saunders
County. Affirmed. Opinion by Maxwell, j.
l.. In charging the commission of an offense
of an indictment, it is not necessary that the
exact words of the statute be used, provided
the words employed are the equivalent in
meaning of those contained in the statute.
2. In an indictment under section 10 of the
| code for shooting with intent to kill, the word
maliciously" was omitted, but it was alleged
that the act was ~"unlawfully, wilfully, pur.
posely and feloniouslym done. Held, That
these words included the full Specification of
would not be set aside nor the indictment
| quaehed, as not stating an ~offense.
Haywood VS.. Thomas, appeal from Burt
county. Affirmed opinion by Cobb, Oh. j.
l. A party in the actual, open, notorious,
| exclusive, adverse possession of real estate for
ten yeZrs, thereby acquires the absolute right
to the exclusive possession of the same. Cat,
ling vs.. Lane.
2. Color of title is not necessary to such
right, except where it is sought to extend the
same beyond the limits actually held posses
sio pedes.
3. Such possession and right carry with
them the title to the real property.
State e1 rel, Phibpott vs. Hunger, mandamus
writ denied. Opinion by Maxwell, j..
Where two or more writs of execution
against the same debtor ara delivered to an
officer on the same day, no preference can be
| given to either; If q sufficient sum of money
be not made to satisfy all the executions, the
amount shall be distributed to the several
creditors in proportion to the amount of their
respective demands. This rule applies to
executions issued by justices of the peace.
State ex rel Cleary V. Russell. Mandamus.
Opinion by Reese, j.
1. The filing of a stay bond under
the provisions of section ATT a OF
the civil code is such a proceeding as is re-
ferred to in the last clause of section LA Of
the code, and such bond may be amended.
2. Where q judgment debtor has in good
faith and within the time provided by law,
filed q bond for stay ofexecution, and which
bond has been approved by the proper APP
proving officer, notice of such approval being
given such debtor. and where it is afterwards
asc srtained that such bond fails to conform tc
the requirements of law and upon application
being made upon notice, for leave to amend,
and such leave being granted by the court and
the defective bond being amended, suct
amended bond, upon an application for
mandamus to compel the issuance of an eXecu-
tion, will be held good, and q writ of manda
mus denied.
Warren V. Dick, error from Cass county
Reversed, az Opinion by Reese, j. l. Where
an attachment proceeding is Instituted against
a nonresident by filing q proIer affidavit
causing an order of attachment to be issued
and levied upon his property, and service Ii
had by publication, a judgment being rem
dered, and the alta ched property sold to 6
good faith purchaser, the appearance by the
defendant within five years, filing an answ-
er to the merits, and procuring the judgment
to be opened under the provisions of section
50 of the civil code. is a general appearance
and valves all irregularities and defects in the
service by publication, and gives the court
jurisdiction over the whole case, If it did moi
before exist, and no question can afterwards
be raised as to the jurisdiction of the court
over the person Of the defendant.
2. Notice of the tendency of the action eN
amined and held to be a compliance witt the
requirments of the statute authorizing service
by publication.
8. A purchaser in good faith of real estate
sold under an order of fale issued in such at.
tachment proceedings, will be held to have &C
quired the title of the judgment debtor, ever
though the judgment may be opened and th'
defendant permitted to make his defense I'm
der the provisions of section 50 of the civil
code.
State OK rel Soutbwick vs. Wilcox, mandamus
Opinion by Maxwell, J.
The city of w. required an applicant for Ii
cense to sell Intoxicating liquors to pay tn
city treasurer 81, 900, one-half of which sun
to be paid to the school district in which w
is situated and the other to be retained by tn,
city as an occupation tax on saloon keepers
Held, That as the entire sum of 81, 900 was re
quired to be paid as a condition of obtaining
a license, it was license money and not q tax
and under the provisions of section 8, articl
VIII of the constitution, belonged to tn
school district.