Omaha daily bee., 1908-11-29
SUPREME COURT SYLLABI.

1907. Hoon against Heon, Appeal from
Lancaster. Affirmed. Good. C.. Division
No. |.
state and who Is separated from her hus-
band without fault on her part may main
tain in the courts of this state an action
in equity against her husband for support
and maintenance. The statute requiring
plaintiff IN actions for divorce and alimony.
to be resident OF the state has no ap-
pllcation. @
her husband for support and maintenance,
IL was not improper for the court to re-
0uire the payments to be made In monthly
installments instead of awarding a judg-
ment for o gross sum.
1885. Watt against Davidson. Appeal
from Wayne. Reversed and remanded.
Cslkins, C. Division No, O.
l. Where an agent authorized to accept
the unconditional delivery of notes, re-
ceives the same upon conditions that he
was not authorized to make, the principal
does not ratify such conditions by accept
ing the notes without any knowledge Of
the fact that they were received by the
agent upon condition.
2 A vendor who has made a written con
tract for the sale of chattels, the price OF
which Is to be paid In notes, does not
by sending blank notes to a bank for the
purpose of securing the signatures Of the
purchasers to such notes in pursuance OF
such written contract, give the bank real
or apparent authority to accept the notes
in escrow, nor under any new or different
iOuulNlOhS Nhoh tipSN 9pCNiheu ~ the con-
1884. Minnesota Thresher MANUFACTURING
Company against J.. Heureux. Appeal from
~Franklin, Reversed and Temanded. Good,
G.. Division No. /.
]. In this state a court does not obtain
Jurisdiction oyer the person Of a defendant
thereof at his late place of residence. and
a. default judgment rendered upon such
service is void.
2. A judgment void upon It's face may
he imnpapbph CO11afaralU
3. An order Of reviVor does not impsrt
any validity to a judgment void upon its
face.
1895. Lewis against The Water and Light
Company Of Nebraska City. Affirmed. APP
peal from Otoe. Fawcett, e. Division No. 9
]. Where the conclusion reached by the
jury was the only one permissible under
the pleadings and evidence, the Judgment
will be affirmed. In such case, errors
occurring at the trial could not have been
prejudicial." Vernon against Union Life
Insurance Company. IS Neb. 4s4, and cases
1886. Raapke & KATE Company against
SehmoelleT g. Mueller Piano Company. APP
peal from Douglas. Affirmed. Caikins. &.
j. Where the question before the jury is
at what point between 800 and $3.50 per
month the rental value of premises wrong
fully detained by defendant should be fixed.
and each OF the parties has introduced OK
pert testimony upon that question, the court
does not err I'm excluding as too remote the
amount OF rent fixed in a lease made two
years prior to the period Of the wrongful
2 Where a lease for the term of two
years provided that the tenant misht at his
option hold the premises for another year
at an annual rental Of $3.50. payable in in
stalments Of $3.50 per month, the fact that
| years term stated TO the tenant that n
! could hold the premises for another year
at $50 per month, Is a mere statement that
, that tenant had such right under the lease,
and not an admission Of the rental value.
3 A witness testifying as an expert Ia
re rental value or real estata may be cross
examined. touching his knowledge Of the
rental value Of other property in the vicin-
ity, but II is not error to exclude on such
valve Of such other property. Such eslimat.
is not a fact. circumstance nor reason upon
| which the witness forms his opinion as Il
! the rental value In issue,
T. In an action upon a bond given upon
! appeal from a judgment Of restitution rem
dered in a suit Of foroible entry and deten-
not confined to the value Of the premise
for the purpose for which they were used
while so wrongfully detained, but II is en-,
premises would bring for any lawful use tc
which they were adapted and for which
they were available.
o. Where a plaintiff n an action upon
an. undertaking given upon appeal from q
Judgment o. restitution rendered In an ac-
cause of action against the principal and
surety with one against the princiIa al alone
such misioinder Is waived under the pro.
visions Of section "a Of the code where nc
objection is made thereto by demurrer o.
answe..
g lVhere witnesses called h prove the
rental value Of certain premises have been
cross-examined concerning the rental value
of other premises IN the vicinity thereof ar
instruction that the latter evidence IL to be
considered only IN determining the weigh
TO be given to the opinions expressed is not
erroneous.
T. Where an amendment 70 8 pleading IL
made by lnteninsation during the trial The
pleading as II stood before the amendment
TIE Amendment and the pleadings al
amended are part OF the record Of the case