TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Chicago Lumber Co. v. Benjamin

Chicago Lumber Company v. John S. Benjamin

Chicago Lumber Co. v. Benjamin, 69 N.W. 769 (Neb. 1897)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Nebraska Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 7, 1897
Docket
No. 6982
Judges
Harrison
Citations
69 N.W. 76950 Neb. 1431897 Neb. LEXIS 414
Disposition
Affirmed.
Headnotes
1. Review: Unautiienticated Bill of Exceptions. A bill of exceptions which is not authenticated by the certificate of the clerk of the trial court is not entitled to consideration in this court. 2. -: -. Where to an examination and settlement of questions argued to this court an inspection of the evidence contained in a bill of exceptions is necessary, and such bill lacks the authentication of the clerk of the trial court, the points presented may be overruled.
Summary
Error from the district court of Custer county. Tried below before Holcomb, J.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Harrison

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Harrison, J.

This case is presented to this court by petition in error to secure a review of the proceedings during its trial in the district court of Custer county, and the errors assigned and argued relate to the sufficiency of the evidence adduced to sustain the verdict rendered, and some other questions, all and singular of which require a reference to the evidence for their examination and settlement. There is attached'to the record what purports to be a bill of exceptions, but it is not authenticated as such instrument by the certificate of the clerk of the trial court. This being true, the evidence is not properly before ns for inspection, and as the points of complaint which are argued cannot be considered without it, they must be overruled. The judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1903: 119032026peak 1903 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Palmer v. Mizner97 N.W. 334 (Neb. 1903)

Most recent

  1. Palmer v. Mizner97 N.W. 334 (Neb. 1903)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list