Omaha daily bee., 1902-06-27
SUPREME COURT SYLLABl

~ tASNtG SSSNN III
1858. Estate OF ]. Fitzgerald against
Union Savings bank. Error from Lancaster.
payable on cali OF the directors does not
S SSSpter WITH xaiiP, tss Pifis9i4 gta 9a ssoti Sntii 2'9 4
call is made; and then only for the amount
2. Creditors Of an estate are not required
TO present their claims to the county court
or to the commissioners appointed TO ex-
anime claims by formal pleadings; a state
ment of the nature and amount of the
claim in the. ordinary form Of an account
or claim bill is sufficient.
8. On appeal to the district court from
an. order OF the county court allowing or
rejecting a r claim n against ah an estate plead d,
the court.
l. such appeal. as in all other cases.
those presented below.
g. Where there are no pleadings in the
in advance OF trial that either party ex-
poets to raise issues not presented below,
II is proper to object to evidence offered in
and the evidence is properly excluded in
case 1t clearly appears from the transcript
that such issues are raised on appeal Tor
9; Where 2 els sinn against an estate 81 has has
secuted IN the name Of the person by whom
I II made De in GOD good fat faith for c,t the gTr-
when sued upon their subscription oannot
question the necessity of or occasion for
making It rests entirely with the directors
or officers OF the corporation to whom the
power has been entrusted.
s. There is no abuse of discretion in
| refusing leave to file a supplemental all
swer during the progress OF a trial where
pllcation before trial, and such application
Is made without notice and without ten
1851. Perenoud against Helm. Error
from Red Willow; Reversed and remanded.
/. In an action for malicious prosecution.
where advice of counsel is relied upon as
planning witness in the criminal prosecu-
ton, should not be allowed to testify that
he related r all OF ths eir SS asiHSt v to the
stating what such facts and circumstances
not be permitted to testify that he be-
iieyed the plaintiff guilty of the crime with
him to State to the jury the facts and cir.
cumstences on which he based his belief.
dence, tending to show that the attorney
consulted by the defendant was not un-
that defendant when he sought such advice
knew of that fact the plaintiff is entitled
70 nave . the jury properly sIyor INSTRUCTED sOI tSs on
court to refuse to give such an instruction.
1885. Noreen against Hansen. Error
/. The statute ~(section ]. chapter liii. Com
piled Statutes) making the property OF a
ali debts contracted for necessaries fur
nished to her family. after execution against
returned unsatisfed, is not in conflict with
section 3 of the bill of rights.
2. In cases arising under the proviso of
section / OF the married woman's act the
cause OF action does not arise, and the
statute OF limitations does not begin to
against the defendants husband has been
returned unsatished.
8. Evidence examined and found suficlent
| to sustain the Judgment.
11755. Drexel against Reed. 11756. Drexel
pany. 1l757. Drexel against Perkins. Errors
from Douglas, Reversed. Hastings, C..
i. Section 2i2. chapter xiii. Compiled
Statutes 1901, is repealed in effect by sec
ton / and 2 of act of February %, 1881, en-
titled A act providing for an appeal from
the decisions OF the county court in GER
tain matters"
act It Is the duty of the county Judge to
transmit TO the district court a transcript
of his proceedings within ten days after an
appeal from an order In probate is per-
8. Under such section the county Judge
has a rikht to payment of fees, but this
right may be waived and will be II he has
established a regular mode of collecting his
fees, which is complied within the given
4. Taking a second appeal in a case does
not OF itself constitute an abandonment of
s Where q party has within due time
done all That Is legally required TO perfect
an appear dnu no waiver OF transmission
Of records by county Judge is shown dis
trct court does not lose jurisdiction OF APP
peal by reason Of its being filed six days
1851. Mcintyre against Malone. Appeal
from otoe. Affirmed. DUNE. c., division
1. The state court should stay proceed
ings in a suit pending against a person
S SsSe BEEN %hS o6mP gsSSsedin sisbd IN ,Ss~nha,r - DSy
petition or by his creditors. II the. pending
suit Is founded upon a claim from which
lease.
2. The state court IN which the suit Is
application for a Stay should be made.
In re Geister 81. Fed. Rep. S22.
g. Actions by a trustee in bankruptcy 10
recover property in the hands of third
parties and which he claims as a part Of
the bankrupt estate. must be prosecuted
such action consent that the same may be
prosecuted IN the federal court. Bardes
4. IN IN action brought 10 set aside a
conveyance Of land and subject the same
TO the payment OF the PLAINTIFFS judgment.
action II it alleges that the conveyance
was made for the purpose and with the
intent to defraud creditors.
1910. Dittman Boot and Shoe company
against Graft. Error from Nemaha. AZ
hrmed. Barnes, c., division No. 2. Unre-
1. Where the defendant. IN, his motion to
dissolve an attachment, denies the truth OF
the facts stated in the affidavit on which
the attachment was obtained. the manner
OF taking the evidence on the hearing OF
the motion, is within the discretion Of the
court.
O. The practice in attachment cases IN
the county courts where the amount In
volved Is above the jurisdiction OF a Justice
OF the peace by chapter Xxx OF the Compiled
Statutes Is made the same as that which
prevails in the district court and the court
has full power TO hear motions TO dissolve
attachments and make the proper orders
thereon.
8. Where the evidence taken in the county
court on a motion 10 dissolve an attach
ment IL not preserved by \ bill OF excep-
uons ana rs not peIors the court Of re-
was SUFFICIENT 10 sustain the judgment end
order OF the lower court.