Omaha daily bee., 1908-10-17
SUPREME COURT

NO6 hEUlG OOOhI
1880. McNeny against Campbell. Appeal
from Webster county. On motion for re-
hearing. Former judgment modified to
read, cause remanded to the district court
for further proceedings" Motion overruled.
Per Curtain.
1895. Amber against Patterson. Appeal
from Douglas county. On motion for re-
hearing, motion overruled. Duffie. G.
1870. Leman against Chapman. Appeal
from Saline county. Affirmed. Calkins, c.
1. A judgment against a surety upon a
supersedeas bond is a debt contracted at
the date of the approval of such bond
within the meaning of that clause of the
land acquired under such law shall not in
any event become liable to the satisfaction
the issuing of the final certificate therefor.
1929. The Red Line Mutual Telephone
Company against Pharris. Appeal from
Nuckolls. Affirmed. Epperson, c.
one party states mere conclusions as to a
contract Is not evidence of the contract.
149oS. Platte Valley Milling company
county. on motion for rehearing. motion
overruled. Barnes, c. j.
1897. Barnes against Sim. Appeal from
Nemaha county. Motion for rehearing
overTuled. Good, c., Division No. l.
/. Contract for assignment examined and
held, under the evidence, to fall within
the provisions of section 1926, Cobbey's an
notated statutes for 1907, which provides
that, when the terms of an agreement have
been intended in a different sense by the
parties to It, that sense is to prevail
against either party in which he had reason
to suppose the other understood it.
2. Syllabus in Barnes against Sim ct al,
1852. The state of Nebraska against
Fisher. Original. Defendant suspended from
practice of his profession in this and the
2. The courts will not interfere with the
proper administration of the business af-
fairs of a litigant, but when necessary will
render assistance therein.
1921. Wiruth against Lashmett. Appeal
from Perkins. Reversed and remanded.
Epperson, c. Division No, l.
i. The exalting Of value by an agent en-
ployed to purchase real estate for his prin-
cipal beyond what he believes 1t to be is
not permitted, and if the principal relies
upon the representations of the agent the
latter and his c-o-conspirator are liable in
damages.
2. In action for the recovery of money
only, a verdict of the jury which finds that
the plaintiff is entitled to recover a certain
amount in cash and also three notes de-
scribed in the verdict is erroneous.
1928, Mohr against Rickgauer. Appeal
from Boyd. Reversed and remanded. Cal
kins, G.
While an oral promise tot pay a commits
sion to a broker for the sale of real estate
is unenforceable because of the statute OF
1897, SO long as 1t rests in parol, 1t consti-
tutes a sufficient consideration to support
a promissory note given in payment OF such
commission,
1924. Nortnass against Pioneer Townsite
Company. Appeal from Dawes. Affirmed.
Good, {. Division No. /.
/. A married woman has no lnchoate right
of dover in real estate which her husband
holds under a contract of purchase, havins
paid only a part of the purchase price. An
assignment of such a contract OF purchase
duly signed and acknowledged by the hus-
band alone is sufficient TO transfer to MS
assignee all his interest in the land so held.
2. When a former decision OF this court
has established a rule OF property winch
has been relied upon for many years as
the foundation of real estate titles, the
court will not overturn such rule, although
II cannot assent to the reasoning upon
which IL is based. GrandJeah against Beyl,
- Neb. -, ia, n. W. A4' followed and
approved.
g. A contract between a vendor and vendee
Of real estate is not affected by any secret
intention of the Yendee to use the premises
for an immoral or unlawful purpose.
1921. Pagan against Pagan. Appeal from
Nance. Affirmed, Fawcett, c. Division
i The allegations contained in the Sth
paragraph of the petition, set out in the
opinion, when considered in connection with
preceding paragraphs of the petition which
allege specific acts of personal violence and
cruel treatment, held, as sufficient to over
come any previous condonement.
?. Evidence examined and set out IN me
opinion, held, sufficient to sustain the
findings of the district court.
1891. international Text Book Co, against
Martin. Appeal from Lancaster, Reversed
and remanded. Root, c. Division No. ?.
1. In an action by a correspondence
school against its pupil for a breach of
contract, arising from the wrongful refusal
OF the latter to pay a balance due for tut
ton, that plaintiff might have employed
the time II would have devoted TO defend
ants Instruction under the contract to the
education OF another scholar is a matter OF
defense, which plaintiff Is not required
TO anticipate in its petition.
2. The burden Of proof is on the de-
PENDANT to establish such defense, and on
failure thereof, or 10 SHOW otheE Facts IN
mitigation OF damages, the measure OF re-
covery is the contract price
1895. Prowett against Nance County. An
peal from Nance. Affirmed. calkins, G
Division No. 3
/. THE act OF April 1. 1901, entitled an act
10 amend sec. 10 Of chap. 10 Comp. Stat
1899. and to repeal said section as now ex-
listing DAVIS 1901. chan. III IL void because
the matter sought TO be added to the
amendment is not germane to the subject
/ OF the section as enacted.
Knight against Lancaster county, "a Neb
50 followed.
2. Where in reliance upon the provlsc
attempted TO be added 10 sec IS. chap. II
Comp stat. by the act OF 1901. (chaD II
laws of 190i. a county treasurer hiring
suit 20 recover the amount paid by him as
| compensation to a surety company upor