Vaughn v. O'Conner
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- Glaze v. Keith (Neb. 1898)
- State ex rel. Galligher v. Holmes (Neb. 1893)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
A trial was had in this case in the county court of .Douglas county, on the 14th day of Eeb., 1880, and a
Sec. 988 of the code of civil procedure provides that: “ It shall be lawful for the justice before whom a cause has been tried on motion, and being satisfied that the verdict was obtained by fraud, partiality, or undue means, at any time within four days after the entering of judgment to grant a new trial, and he shall set a time for a new trial, of which the opposite party shall have three days notice.
County courts are governed by the same provisions of the statute in granting a new trial as a justice of the peace, Cox v. Tyler, 6 Neb., 203. The question therefore depends upon the construction to be given to the section above quoted. The language is: “It shall be lawful for the justice * * * * * * at any time within four days after the entering of judgment to grant a new trial, ” etc. The new trial is to be granted within four days, if at all. The authority of a justice of the peace or county judge to grant a new trial is derived wholly from the statute, and it must be exercised in the manner and within the time limited, therein. Cox v. Tyler, 6 Neb., 297. Fox v Meacham, Id., 530. The county court had no authority therefore, on the 8th day of March, to set aside a verdict rendered on the 14th day of February.
The judgment of the district court is reversed and also
'Judgment Accordingly.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.