Omaha daily bee., 1903-02-06
SUPREME COURT SYLLABl

124Si. Perkins against Missouri Pacific
Railroad company. Error from Sarpy Az
flrmed. Barnes. c., division No. 2. Tn
reported.
/. In an action to recover damages for an
fcnse lnterposed ia termination OF the
the manner provided for therein, the YER.
II is unsupported by the evidence. and is
clearly wrong.
2. In instructing juries the practice ot
copying the pleadings in order to state the
issues to be determined is not to be com
mended. Ii might confuse the jury, whore
the issues are numerous and the pleadings
complicated, but unless we can fairly say
that such was the result verdict will
not be set aside for instructing In that
3. one cannot complain because an In
struction is too general in its nature, un-
less he has requested the court to give one
been refused. Carter White Lead company
against Kinln, AZ Neb., 400; Barr against
T. A party Cannot complain of an instruc-
tion for stating an issue therein which was
properly made by the plesdings and which
was accepted and tried without objections
on his part.
s. instructions examined and held that
they were properly given and fairly sub
mitted the case to the jury.
s. Assignments of error on account of re-
ceiving and rejecting evidence. although
amined and held not to contain reversible
error.
Z. A party having knowledge OF facts,
during the trial OF a cause, which he claims
constitute misconduct the part of
juror must make the same known TO the
promptly disposed Of This he must do
as matter of good faith, and he will not
be permitted to withhold such knowledge
from the court during the trial, allow the
case to he submitted to a jury and thus
speculate upon the verdict. BY such con
right to new trial on that ground, unless
he satisfy the court that the juror. as "A
matter Of fact, was prejudiced against him
thereby and could not render a fair and
impartial verdict in the case.
1244O; Whelen against Stillwell. Appeal
from Douglas. Affirmed. Barnes, C, divi-
sion No. 2. Unreported.
1. Under the statute requiring an officer
to certify liens to the sheriff, on property
about to be sold at judicial sale, Il is sum-
cient II the general character Of such liens
be stated in the certificate. Orcutt against
e. Rule No II Of the district court of
Douglas county. which requires bidders at
judicial sales. to. deposit $50 with the sheriff
as evidence Of their good faith Is reason. ason.
able one. Green against Diezel, No. 120S6
(unreported), and Cumming against Hart,
No. l24S4 (unreported), approved and fol-
l2444. Fergus against Gagnon. Appeal
from Richardson. Affirmed. Oldham, c.,
division No. 2. Unreported.
/. In an action of replevin before Justice
of the peace the affidavit is the only plead
ing required.
J. An affidavit in replevin before justice
of the peace need not allege the value of
the property repevined.
3. When the return of the officer TO a
writ of replevin shows that the summons
and writ was served on the defendant and
that the property could not be taken on
account of the resistance of Ihe defendant,
the action may proceed as an action In
damages for the value of the property
1. Where a court has power to grant the
relief sought In proper case mistake In
doing so in an improper but similar case
will not render the entire proceedings void
and subject the judgment to collateral at
tack.
12I45. Murray against Romine. Appeal
from Douglas. Affirmed. Dufie, c., dlvi-
sion No. 8 Unreported;
12446 Estate OF William Barr against
Post. Error from Lancaster. Reversed and
dismissed. Duffie. c., division No. 3. Un-
reported.
of case will not be allowed as an ele-
ment Of damages for an injunction wrong
fully obtained II the injunction proceed
i2448 Village of Holstein against Klein.
Error from Adams. Affirmed. Pound, c..
dXiSS% SocG%eHt MS aeeOmpaRying transcript
will be disregarded unless authenticated by
the certificate of the clerk OF the district
1880 SILK against Mcdonald. Appeal
from Douglas Reversed, with instructions.
Albert c., division No. 3. Unreported.
/. A judgment in an action in ejectment.
in favor of one holding the paper title 20
real estate, against one claiming by ad-
verse possession, is not binding on the wife
of the latter, II not party thereto, In a
subsequent action brought by her TO pro-
tect her homestead rights I'm such premises,
where It appears that the adverse posses
sion had ripened into a title in fee before
the action against her husband was
brought.
12452 Harmon against Church. Appeal
from Nemaha. Affirmed. Hastings, C.,
division No. 1. Unreported.
l. Evidence examined and held to sup
port the decree of the district court. The
only question being as to the ownership
of certain shares of stock.
12461. Ebel against Stringer. Appeal from
Holt Reversed oldham c., division No 2.
Unreported.
The hling and approval of a supersedeas
bond I'm an error proceeding from a tuGg-
ment of the district court suspends the lien
thereto and the running of the statute Of
Limitation against the lien of such 1udg-
ment is suspended during the pendency of
such error proceedings In the supreme
court.
Frisco Directors Meet.
nj of ~