Reports of Cases in the Supreme Court of Nebraska (Volume 37) (Paperback)


Book may have numerous typos, missing text, images, or index. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. 1894. Not illustrated. Excerpt: ... Reed v. Davis Milling Co. rights in the premises, and in our view the proof is sufficient to entitle the plaintiff to recover. Some objection is made to the form of the action, in -ffect that the action is brought in the name of the estate and not the administrator. It does appear that the action is brought by Boyd as administrator of the estate of Frankman, and that he is such administrator. There is no merit in the defense and the judgment is Affirmed. The other judges concur. Reed Bros. & Company V. R. T. Davis Milling Company. Filed June 30, 1893. No. 5031. Assumpsit: Evidence: Review. In an action on account for flour sold and delivered, a number of defenses were set up which the proof failed to sustain, and the jury having found for the plaintiff, held, that the judgment was right and no error in the record. Error from the district court of Cass county. Tried below before Chapman, J. H. D. Travis, for plaintiff in error. A. N. Sullivan and Gregory, Day & Day, contra. Maxwell, Ch. J. This is an action upon an account for flour sold and delivered to recover the sum of $261, with interest from September 1, 1890. Reed v. Davis Milling Co. To the petition the defendant below filed an answer as follows: "Comes now the defendant herein and for answer to plaintiff's petition admits that the plaintiff is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the state of Missouri; admits that the defendant is a corporation organized under the laws of the state of Nebraska and doing a general merchandise business at Weeping Water, Nebraska. "2. Defendant admits that on or about the 1st of September, 1890, the defendant purchased of and from the plaintiff a bill of goods, to-wit, flour; that the said flour was sold to defendant by plaintiff, the price of which was $633.20. ...

R1,077

Or split into 4x interest-free payments of 25% on orders over R50
Learn more

Discovery Miles10770
Mobicred@R101pm x 12* Mobicred Info
Free Delivery
Delivery AdviceOut of stock

Toggle WishListAdd to wish list
Review this Item

Product Description

Book may have numerous typos, missing text, images, or index. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. 1894. Not illustrated. Excerpt: ... Reed v. Davis Milling Co. rights in the premises, and in our view the proof is sufficient to entitle the plaintiff to recover. Some objection is made to the form of the action, in -ffect that the action is brought in the name of the estate and not the administrator. It does appear that the action is brought by Boyd as administrator of the estate of Frankman, and that he is such administrator. There is no merit in the defense and the judgment is Affirmed. The other judges concur. Reed Bros. & Company V. R. T. Davis Milling Company. Filed June 30, 1893. No. 5031. Assumpsit: Evidence: Review. In an action on account for flour sold and delivered, a number of defenses were set up which the proof failed to sustain, and the jury having found for the plaintiff, held, that the judgment was right and no error in the record. Error from the district court of Cass county. Tried below before Chapman, J. H. D. Travis, for plaintiff in error. A. N. Sullivan and Gregory, Day & Day, contra. Maxwell, Ch. J. This is an action upon an account for flour sold and delivered to recover the sum of $261, with interest from September 1, 1890. Reed v. Davis Milling Co. To the petition the defendant below filed an answer as follows: "Comes now the defendant herein and for answer to plaintiff's petition admits that the plaintiff is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the state of Missouri; admits that the defendant is a corporation organized under the laws of the state of Nebraska and doing a general merchandise business at Weeping Water, Nebraska. "2. Defendant admits that on or about the 1st of September, 1890, the defendant purchased of and from the plaintiff a bill of goods, to-wit, flour; that the said flour was sold to defendant by plaintiff, the price of which was $633.20. ...

Customer Reviews

No reviews or ratings yet - be the first to create one!

Product Details

General

Imprint

General Books LLC

Country of origin

United States

Release date

2012

Availability

Supplier out of stock. If you add this item to your wish list we will let you know when it becomes available.

First published

2012

Authors

Dimensions

246 x 189 x 18mm (L x W x T)

Format

Paperback - Trade

Pages

328

ISBN-13

978-1-234-99766-3

Barcode

9781234997663

Categories

LSN

1-234-99766-5



Trending On Loot