stepson’s second amended petition filed more than 4 years after the distribution of father’s estate alleging promissory fraud and undue influence related back to petition and first amended petition in which he alleged the will, family settlement, oral promises by member of the family, and subsequent nonperformance of those promises entitled him to distribution
How later courts described this case
- stepson’s second amended petition filed more than 4 years after the distribution of father’s estate alleging promissory fraud and undue influence related back to petition and first amended petition in which he alleged the will, family settlement, oral promises by member of the family, and subsequent nonperformance of those promises entitled him to distribution
- where amount of claim is liquidated, compensation in form of prejudgment interest is allowed as matter of right
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Clinton, J.,
concurring.
I concur in the result and in the opinion of the court, but I would deal with the issues raised by the “receipt” as follows. The recital in the “receipt” re “the only oral promise” was at most merely an admission against interest. In any event it is ambiguous on its face as to whether it pertains to the transaction which is the basis of the suit. Dunn v. Alexander, 104 Neb. 628 , 178 N. W. 215 , governs. The receipt raised only a jury question and the jury found for Arthur.