Case Name: D. P. Bliss et al., plaintiffs in error, v. D. M. Benedict, defendant in error
Court: Nebraska Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Nebraska
Decision Date: 1888-07
Citations: 24 Neb. 346
Docket Number: 
Parties: D. P. Bliss et al., plaintiffs in error, v. D. M. Benedict, defendant in error.
Judges: The other judges concur.
Reporter: Nebraska Reports
Volume: 24
Pages: 346–346

Head Matter:
D. P. Bliss et al., plaintiffs in error, v. D. M. Benedict, defendant in error.

Opinion:
Maxwell, J.
The questions presented in this case are substantially the same as in Peru Plow & Wheel Co., just decided, an additional ground of attachment being that defendant had absconded so that summons could not be served upon him, etc. The proof entirely fails to sustain this charge, or any of the charges set forth in the affidavit.
The judgment of the district court is right, and is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
The other judges concur.