Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1905-12-26
SUPREME COURT SYLLGBI

December 20. 1876.
lzlSc. Clesnd against Anderson. Error
from Dawson. On rchearing rormer Judg
ment vacated, judgment OF district court
reversed. cause dismissed as to Nebraska
hetsi Lumber Dealers ASSOCIATION aud
ieudrdcd Iyt new trial as to detenlantS
ClelAnd ana Carroll. Scdswick. j.
L Toe right 81 action stven BY section
II, chapter 81. Complied Statutes, Cobbey's
jury TO business, employment or prop
erty,' and under the national bankruptcy
act passes To the assignee IN bankruptcy,
1888 state against State Journal Com
pany. Original Demurrer sustained case
dismissed. SetgwiCk, j.
The unauthorized use OF the literary
production OF anotner furnishes no ground
ior the recovery o. damages except
through the federal copyright laws All
persons are az liberty 10 print, publish
unless they are protected by a compliance
with the act Of congress for tpat purpose,
Merely reposing confidence IN an
other does not OF itself create n trust,
nor make trustee of one in whom conf
dence mas been reposed. To create a
sary that the consent OF the trustee to
assume that relation be expressed in the
contract or be derived therefrom oy nee
cssary implication.
B. The measure of damages for the I'M
authorized use of the property of another
by a baiee thereof is not the value that
may be produced by the labor and invest
ment Of the bailee combined with such
use of the property, but is the value of
be done 20 the property in so using it, or
II the use amounts to a conversion, then
the measure of damages will be the value
T. II the defendant printed and manu-
featured TO sell for its own benefit vol
umcs Of the reports of the supreme court
Of the state, containing matter prepared
ny the state and not protected BY copy
right. and In 80 doing unlawfully used
manuscripts and other property entrusted
TO the care of the defendant to enable II
to perform its contracts TO manufacture
specified volumes for the state, this would
not give the state title to books so un-
lawfully produced so as to enable II, by
Injunction. TO prevent the defendant from
disposng of the books, or entitle the state
to an accounting of the proceeds OF such
sales.
1884 Preston against Morsman. APP
peal, Douglas. Affirmed. Jackson, Z. Di-
/. A mortgage may. by agreement, fix
secured by a mortgage to the mortgage
security, and such an agreement may he
implied from the circumstances of the
2 A decree of a court vested with juris-
dction over the subject matter and the
persons in interest, liking the status OK
series of notes secured by single mort
gage, is binding on one who, In supse-
quent action, attempts to avoid the effect
OF the decree. where II appears that the
transfer of the note involved In the latter
holders of the other notes.
1856. North IL Co. against Angelo. Err
ror, Lancaster. Reversed and remanded.
Dhlllt' - l1lNlSioh Nv - SNNS"iN 49,
dissents.
A case appealed to the district court
must be tried In that court upon the issues
presented in the lower court.
1875. In re Estate of Nelson, deceased.
Larson against Thorson. Error. Saunders.
Reversed Letton, c. Division No. l..
/. Where a testator, though aged and in
firm, understands the nature or the act
he is performing. knows and can retain in
mind the amount and character of his
property and who are or naturally should
be the objects OF his bounty, and has a
full understanding of the persons or insti-
tutions. to whom and the purposes for
which his devises and requests are made,
he is competent TO make will.
g Where a verdict and judgment is the
only one that could be supported under
the evidence, errors in the rulings OF the
court are without prejudice and Will not DE
1895. New. Omaha Thompson; Houston
Electric Light Company against R9mbo dd
MED. Holcomb, c. J.
J. Whether IL was the duty of the de-
PENDANT due to the plaintiff to insulate the
wires described and complained of in the
petition, or whether because of the nature
Of the work the contract OF emP fhs d9tY
to make inspection and discover defects
devolved upon the, plaintiff are under the
issues and the evidence held to be ques-
tions properly submitted to the jury for
its determination.
which is manifest to the sense OF observa
ton, open and readily discernible, whether
IL arises from the nature of the business
the particular manner in which II Is con
Quoted, or the use of defective and un
safe appliances
open and obvious is held to be a question
of fact for the jury.
Applying the rule OF the law OF IN
care on the lineman's part required tina
he see and avoid contact with the EXPOSED
spices was properly left to the jury
1878. Clarke against Turkey Land Com
pany. Error from Douglas. Affirmed. old
nam. G. Division No. !. --.-,
1. purely specious claim of OWNERSHIP
viii not Gust the Jurisdiction OF a justice q
The peace In an action of forcible entry an
detaner.
9 When a tenant from month to mont
makes default in the payment of the ren
reserved and holds over after such default
his occupancy is that of tenant at suffer
ance, and such tenancy must be terminate
by the landlord by service of the statutor
notice of three DAYS to quit the possession
>. The statute OF limitations against a
action of forcible entry and detainer again;
a tenant holding at sufferance begins I
run against the landlord on the terminate
= weatherhcld against Union Pacific I
1887 Hunt against Van Burg. Errc
from Lancaster. Affirmed. Lotion c. ID
/. Where a case is tried upon an agree
stipulation of facts and oral and write
evidence, II is proper for the jury to col
slider all the evidence, even though part
II may be inconsistent with the statemeI
Of facts.
2. In an action of bona fide purcha 3,
Of a negotiable instrument for value befo
maturity without notice where the defeni
is fraud in the procurement of the pape
evidence of similar frauds committed
the agent OF the payee about the same tin
is inadmissablo Monitor Pillow Worl
against Born, 80 Neb. 747.
lsOlI. Hopper against Douglas County. A
hrmed. Oldham, c. Division No. /.
l. county is not liable I'm damages to q
individual landholder for the negligent
version OF surface water in the improV
ment and construction Of its public hg
ways.
.. a county is not liable in damages f
the negligent acts of its officers, unle
made so by legislative enactment,
l4OlS Hopper against Douglas County. L
ror from Douglas. Affirmed Oldham,
Division No. /.
1926 Vcrtrees against Gage County L
TOr from Gage. Oldham, G.. Division No
Reversed and remanded.
The burden of sustaining the affirmati
Of an issue involved in an action does n
shift during the progress OF the trial. D
is upon the party alleging the facts cons
tuting the issue, and remains there till [
end. Rupp against Sarpy County, Neb.
y. w. 1912; Neb. lo2, n. w 2i2, follow
and approved.
1869, Thesing against Westergreu Err
from York. Affirmed. Jackson, c. Div
ion No. ?.
l. During the tendency OF an appeal fro
judgment of the district court ConfrI
ing "A judicial sale. the supreme court
vested with jurisdiction to entertain an a
piCation TO redeem and to determine [
amount OF redemption money required
that purpose. and where such jurisdicti
IS exercised the adjudication of the app