Conservative Savings & Loan Ass'n v. City of Omaha
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- FIRST NATIONAL BANK NORTH PLATTE v. Sheets (Neb. Ct. App. 2007)
- BURKE LUMBER & COAL COMPANY v. Anderson (Neb. 1956)
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
Naomi A. Ferguson, a minor, on April 14, 1900, recovered a judgment against the city of Omaha for $1,25( and costs, in an action for personal injuries received F her on the streets of said city. On April 18, 1900, he father, Charles T. Ferguson, filed a petition praying fo his appointment as her guardian in the county court o' Douglas county, and on the same day an order ivas en tered by the county court appointing him guardian, upon his taking the oath and filing bond with security to. be approved by the court. On the same day the oath of Charles T. Ferguson and a bond signed by Ferguson, as principal, and the American Bonding & Trust Company, as surety, Avere executed and filed, and on the 25th day of April the bond Avas approved and letters of guardianship issued. After the order appointing Ferguson guardian, and the execution of and filing the bond, but before its approval, Ferguson as guardian sold and assigned the judgment at its face value to the Conservative Savings & Loan Association of Omaha, plaintiff in error. On November 12, 1900, on the application of the surety on Ferguson’s bond, the county court found that Ferguson held as guardian $833.35, for which, with interest, he and his bondsmen were liable, and entered an order removing Ferguson and appointing Frank Crawford as guardian.
The primary object of the suit was to declare the plaintiff entitled to recover the amount of the judgment from
As the record stands there is no controversy between the city and tbe plaintiff. Tiie city has made default in the action, and plaintiff seems to be entitled to a decree against it. If the city desires to avoid the contingency of being compelled to pay the amount of the judgment twice, it should appear and defend in the action by asking that the court determine the respective rights of the plaintiff and CraAvford to the fund in its hands. There being no final judgment against the city, however, the judgment of the district court dismissing the case should be reversed and the cause remanded, with directions to dismiss the case as to the American Bonding & Trust Company, and for further proceedings as to Crawford and the city of Omaha in acordance with this opinion.
By the Court: For the reasons stated in the foregoing opinion, the judgment of the district court dismissing the case is reversed and the cause remanded, with directions to dismiss the case as to the American Bonding & Trust
Reversed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.