Omaha daily bee., 1902-05-11

from Lancaster. Affirmed Albert, c. De-
partment No. 3. Unreported.
A judgment will not be reversed for err
rors of law occurring at the trial unless II
is alleged in the petition In error and shown
by the record that the court erred in over
ruling the motion for n new trial.
No. 1882. M~cConaughey against Farney.
Error from Hamilton. Reversed with IN
structions., Ames, c. Department No. g.
An action cannot be maintained by a
vendor or his assignee to recover from his
veyed in fraud Of Creditors. II in such
case the transferee participated in the
condito defendtism. applies. If he did not
without his fault by the defrauded creditors
there has been a breach of the warranty
title accompanying the sale which will de-
No. 1854. starr against voss. Appeal
from Douglas. Reversed and remanded.
ported.
tax sale certificate and for subsequent
taxes and special assessments paid such
certificate and receipts signed by the proper
oticers are pr1ma facie evidence of the
validity of the taxes represented by them.
IRE against Reichenberg, - Neb.. -, fol-
1141s. sussay against william ]. Lemn
Brewing company. Error from Douglas.
Affirmed. Ames, C., division No. 3.
l. When the judgment of a district court
I'm a proceeding in error to review the judg-
ment of a justice of the peace is sought to
be reviewed in this court the transcript Of
this court must contain the judgment OF
the justice OF the peace and such other
process and pleadings as 1t is sought to
have reviewed or corrected.
2. This court cannot decide whether the
district court erred In permitting an amend
ment to the return Of a process. unless the
authenticated copies of them, are preserved
in the record or bill Of exceptions.
this court does not contain a transcript
from the Journal or the district court of an
alleged order made by, that court its abb
Bill Of exceptions, certified by the court
reporter to be true that such an order was
the bill Of exceptions certihes that the
recital is false and orders it to be stricken
li4s7. President and Directors of the In
surance Company OF North America against
Packer. Appeal from Lancaster. Affirmed.
Pound, C., division No. 2.
/. Alleged errors in matters OF procedure.
occurring at or before trial. are not re-
2. A cause OF action for alleged abuse OF
process and malicious prosecution of a civil
suit, based on an attempt to foreclose a
not be set up by way OF counter claim in
a subsequent suit to foreclose said mort
gage.
8. The allegation that no proceedings have
been had at law, required In foreclosure
suits. need not be proved beyond possibility
of Inference TO the contrary; 1t Is enough,
where no evidence appears to dispute 1t. IL
the plaintiff made a prima facie case,
llbl0. Enyart against Moran. Appeal from
otoe., Affirmed. Barnes, c., division No. 2
1. The district court has power to set
aside, change or modify its Judgments dur
An application to set aside a decree and
allow the introduction of evidence upon a
technical point is addressed to the discre-
tion of the court, and error cannot be pre-
dicated upon the ruling thereon.
2. A purchaser OF real estate. who takes
his title by quit claim deed, with actual
knowledge OF the lien OF an unrecorded
mortgage thereon, and who shows by his
and caused inquiry to be made as TO the
amount of the lien, cannot afterward claim
that he is an innocent purchaser for value.
third person, not. the agent OF the lien
holder, to ascertain the amount due upon
the mortgage, cannot defeat a recovery OF
any portion of the mortgage debt on ac-
count of a mistake, as TO the amount OF
the Lien; made by such third person
to sustain the decree. That where there is
sufficient evidence to show priua facie that
menced at law to recover any portion OF
the mortgage debt and such evidence is
thereon will be sustained.
1884. Dockarty against Tiliotson. Error
from Douglas. Affirmed Ames. c., divi-
/. Although agency cannot be proved by
the admissions or declarations OF the al
against an alleged principal the latter calls
the former as a witness and induces him
TO testify that he never represented himself
In dispute, the testimony may be contra
dictec by proof OF specific Instances in ]
which the witness did so represent himself.
In other words, he may be subjected To
the same tests Of credibility as would be
applicable 10 other witnesses under ike
circumstances.
2. An agent who contracts in his own
with respect 10 matters within the
scope of his agency Is personally obligated
although the fact Of such agency is known
10 the opposite party.
1883. Clary against Watkins. Appeal
Nemaha. Affirmed. Day, C.. division
l.
l. @. died intestate. leaving surviving her
issue nor husband, father, mother,
brother, sister, nephew, niece, grandfather,
grandmother or grandchildren. Her near
relative being two uncles and an aunt.
ana second cousins. Held, That
under our statute or descent the two uncles
and the aunt took the entire estate to the
OF cousins and second cousins.
2 II H. the object Of our statute TO cut
on Inheritance per stripes among ~colIaterals