Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. First National Bank
Cases that cite this one
3 later published cases cite this decision.
- Reetz v. Olson (Neb. 1945)
- Allen v. Estate of Allen (Neb. 1908)
- Palmer v. McFarlane (Neb. 1907)
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
Aided by exceptionally lucid and forceful arguments, we have again carefully examined the record in this case, and have again reached the conclusion that the judgment of the district court is adequately supported by competent and credible proof, and should, therefore, be affirmed. The original opinion (Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. First Nat. Bank of Omaha, 58 Nebr., 548, 78 N. W. Rep., 1064) contains what is believed to be a substantially accurate statement of the main facts; and, since counsel for appellant expressly conceded in the oral argument that no disputed question of law is involved, we think it sufficient at this time to announce the result of our deliberations. The judgment in favor of the appellee will stand
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.