TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Bank of Cortland v. Maxey

Bank of Cortland v. Edwin Maxey

Bank of Cortland v. Maxey, 165 N.W. 467 (Neb. 1917)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Nebraska Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
December 15, 1917
Docket
No. 19096
Judges
Cornish, Eose, Sedgwick
Citations
165 N.W. 467102 Neb. 201917 Neb. LEXIS 2
Disposition
Reversed.
Headnotes
Trial: Directed Verdict. The trial court should not direct the verdict of the jury unless the evidence is so clear upon every point upon which the verdict must depend that reasonable minds could not come to any other conclusion.
Summary
Appeal from the district court for Lancaster county: Albert J. Cornish, Judge.

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

Opinion of the Court — Sedgwick

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

Sedgwick, J.

In this case the trial court directed a verdict and entered a judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant appealed. The action was upon a promissory note given by the defendant to W. B. Sprague, who was the president and principal manager for the Lost Springs Coal Company. The alleged consideration for the note was the purchase of stock in that company. The note was assigned by Sprague to the plaintiff bank. This court upon the first presentation entered a judgment of affirmance without an opinion. Afterwards a re-argument was ordered, and, upon further consideration of the evidence in this record, we conclude that it is not so clear that the note sued upon was fairly obtained, upon a sufficient consideration, or that this plaintiff is the owner of the note in due course without notice of defendant’s rights as against the original payee as to require the trial court to take the case from the consideration of the jury. As the case will be again tried, it is not deemed advisable to discuss or recite the evidence.

The judgment of the district court is therefore reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.

Eeversed.

Eose and Cornish, JJ., not sitting.

How later courts describe this case

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

1922: 11930: 11932: 11934: 119222026peak 1922 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Vrbsky v. Arendt229 N.W. 337 (Neb. 1930)
  2. Oswald v. Equitable Life Assurance Society258 N.W. 41 (Neb. 1934)
  3. Ashby v. Peters245 N.W. 408 (Neb. 1932)
  4. Ryne v. Liebers Farm Equipment Co.186 N.W. 358 (Neb. 1922)

Most recent

  1. Oswald v. Equitable Life Assurance Society258 N.W. 41 (Neb. 1934)
  2. Ashby v. Peters245 N.W. 408 (Neb. 1932)
  3. Vrbsky v. Arendt229 N.W. 337 (Neb. 1930)
  4. Ryne v. Liebers Farm Equipment Co.186 N.W. 358 (Neb. 1922)

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