Case Name: Elizabeth Galligher, appellant, v. William J. Connell et al., appellees
Court: Nebraska Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Nebraska
Decision Date: 1895-11-08
Citations: 46 Neb. 372
Docket Number: No. 5515
Parties: Elizabeth Galligher, appellant, v. William J. Connell et al., appellees.
Judges: Irvine, C., not sitting.
Reporter: Nebraska Reports
Volume: 46
Pages: 372–373

Head Matter:
Elizabeth Galligher, appellant, v. William J. Connell et al., appellees.
Filed November 8, 1895.
No. 5515.
Quieting Title: Stare Decisis. The facts in this case and the law applicable thereto are substantially the same as those in Connell v. Qctlligher, 36 Neb.,749, and39 Neb.,793, and following these cases, the decree is affirmed.
Appeal from the district court of Douglas county. Heard below before Doane, J.
Gi’egory, Day & Day, for appellant.
Connell & Ives, contra.

Opinion:
Ragan, C.
This is in appeal from a decree of the district court of Douglas county. The action was one in equity brought by Mrs. Galligher against Connell and others to have quieted and confirmed in her the title to certain real estate. The real estate involved is a part of the tracts, the title to which was litigated in Connell v. Galligher, 36 Neb., 749, 39 Neb., 793. The decision of the court in this last case controls and supports the decree appealed from. In the case at bar the district court found specially that Connell was the owner of the legal title to the premises in controversy. This finding was correct under the facts in evidence and the law. (See Connell v. Galligher, 36 and 39 Neb., supra, in which the evidence was substantially the same as in the case under consideration.) But this conclusion of the district court was correct, if we omit all. consideration of Connell v. Galligher, 36 and 39 Neb., supra, and the evidence on which those decisions were based, for the reason in the case at bar Connell, among other defenses, pleaded that he and his grantors had been in the open, notorious, exclusive, and adverse possession of the premises in controversy, claiming title thereto, for more than ten years before Mrs. Galligher brought this suit. The evidence in the record sustains such defense. The decree of the district court is
Affirmed.
Irvine, C., not sitting.