Omaha daily bee., 1902-07-05
Reviewed sna -
trust assinst Edgar.

reversed and the cause remanded with d.
recuon to enter a decree OF foreclosure ~
neOe. Wolf against Haslack, appeal,
Platte: affirmed. Hastings, c., Division No.
l. A bill OF sale Of a reversionary inter-
est In funds ~belonging TO an estate which
vent evidence by parol that the real con-
siderauon was that the assignee should
hold the funds on the same terms, and
Tor the same purposes as an executor had
previously done.
se y As o. set sTSs5 the parties sEtssm s and I in The se,
trust in chattel property need not be in
ii6ss. Shelby against Creishton, error,
Douglas; affirmed. Albert, c., Division No.
1. Where a judgment is necessarily based
on certain premises. such premises are
equally conclusive, in a subsequent action
between the same parties, as the Judgment
q A sale to a trustee, OF the trust prop
erty, Is not void at all times and undef
que trust has the option TO affirm or re-
pudiate such sale; an unreasonable delay
In making such election will be construed
as an afnrmance.
3. Where the administrator Of the estate
Of an intestate, who is also executor and
the personal estate OF such intestate, be-
comes a purchaser of a part of the per-
accounts SGoi ts'A FOR the the p pr sSss OF such sale.
and the record of the court from which he
received his appointment. on the final hear
ing OF his accounts, d~iscloses that he was
such purchaser a final order OF such court,
approving. such accounts ard ~discharging
cestui que trust. having notice Of such
proceeding, on the question OF the validity
Of such sale, until reversed or set aside
T. After such order has stood for fifteen
SnottSs; TIE s sroS SSSo OF n tra sSui ~ rm no set or a cane
not be maintained, Unless II appear that the
facts, constituting such fraud, were UNI
complained OF was made.
g.. On the facts stated. held, that this
plaintiffs cause OF action ts barred by her
own laches. as well as by the statute OF
limitations.
1889. City OF lincoln. against Bell; ep-
peal. Lancaster; affirmed. Kirkpatrick, c.,
/. where a bill of exceptions has been
clerk, a new trial will not be granted in
an action at law upon a petition in. equity.
lost bflii' cannot be supplied as other lost
records.
a new trial in an action at law on account
OF the loss OF a bill Of exceptions duly
settled, allowed and filed with the clerk.
8, Petition examined and held not 10
state facts sufficient to entitle plaintiff to
4. Evidence examined and held sufficient
70, sustain the finding and Judgment of the
1854. Haskell against button; error, Lam
c%asteri affirmed. Sullivan. C. j..
l. One whG Is In possession Of an office
hlih- CAClNlSAhb hn ldhNNAbllH ny VI
an irregular appointment from the person
having. awful authority to appoint, is q
2. The acts Of a de facto oficer. so far
as they affect the public or third persons,
8. A challenge to the Jurisdiction Of the
court grounded upon the fact that the
summons was issued by an irregularly APP
be sustained. ,
T. When the evidence upon which the
trial court acted In refusing to 0uaQh tho
service of a summons, Is not preserved
In a Dill or exceptions, this court will pre-
decision.
1iS6i, Leake against Lucas; error. Dodge.
1. When a husband is actually a part OF
the family, living with It as such, and
by Illness, his maintenance. and support,
including. necessary medical attendance.
S %SIcS f mshys within tbs T, The TIlS Of : the ssrs stStg 5ts
2 In such case where the husband and
tained against him in this state, the OBJ
courts where he resides causing an execu-
ton to issue thereon and having II re-
with the provisions Of section j, chapter
lii of the compiled statutes to sustain an
action against the wife to recover for such
1883. Gadsden against johnson, appeal,
Colfax. Affirmed. Dufie. c., Division No.
! a formal release of a mortgage exc
cuted by the mortgage ~extinguishes the
fully paid or not, II the release Is made
through inadvertance or mistake the Hen
prop peS P %ocesdks MAY taken Rs th rs1nsle'ea O'
Z. EXidence examined and held to sup
1880. Fremont Carriage Manufacturing
company against Thomsoni error, Dodge.
Affirmed. barnes, C.; Division No; !:
sell its own stock and hold. reissue or re-
IN fie entire SdT T good' f Sfi3S'a and f IN no J manner ln TI IN.
lures the rights of the creditors or Its
2. A contract with a corporation by which
II sells certain OF its shares Of stock and
agrees to re.purchase the same, upon the
not ultra wires and for a breach Thereof
the purchaser may recover Of the corpora
ton the amount agreed upon as the price
8. Where such a contract has been made
by the corporation by and through It's pres
ident and general Manager Il viii not b,
permitted bt9ad to FSSS s e s ana retain raSa6,s shs benefit sSS as.
against Ponca, SO Neb:, $50. go
/. A contract for, the purchase OF Ger
for the re-purchase of the same upon the
. happening of a certain event, where It hal
ties thereto, is not within the statute o
n frauds,
&. Where one acting as the agent Of
which Is binding upon It, HIS acts in tina
Q behalf create no Individual or persona
n liability against him..
Q 1882. Union Stock Yards National ban
against Board of County Commissioner
error, Thurston. Affirmed. Oldham, O.
Division No. 2.
n /. A bill Of exceptions of the evidence
. offered in q proceeding before the Boar
r of County Commissioners must be signed
settled and allowed by the chairman OF suol
z board.
2. A Board of County Commissioners un
der the provisions of section 1, article II
chapter lxxvii of the compiled statutes ha
the authority to correct errors and omis
sions in the assessment rolls Of the count,
Of which they are commissioners 'withi
Q six months from the time the taxes would
If regularly assessed, become delinquent.
1905. Parker against Nothomhi errol
Seward. Reversed and demanded. Hast
ings, O., Division No. l.
The word "unmarriedH In section /. char
ter xxxvii, compiled statutes OF Nebraska
does not properly refer TO the mother
n status at the time,of making the complain
II In bastaTdy, but only TO such status at sue
time as II will affect the question OF IN
y legitimacy Of the child, or the liability G
the husband to support IT..
te 1897. Carson against Jansen: appea
Lancaster. Affirmed. Pound, c., Divisio
Is i. In cases not within the purview Of Sc,
0t ton GU, Code Of Civil Procedure, the dii
10 trict court may in its discretion allow
ot supersedeas upon conditions which II d.
termines 10 be proper or necessary for II
], protection of the parties.