Summary
The Supreme Court of Nebraska affirmed a judgment against Gary and Janet Coble for an account assigned to Professional Collection Service. The court held that any defect in identifying the plaintiff in the caption was waived because the defendant did not timely object, and that the evidence supported the judgment.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the plaintiff's use of the trade name Professional Collection Service rather than the legal name Credit Bureau of North Platte, Inc., constituted reversible error.
- Whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain the judgment against Gary Coble.
Holdings
- Although the legal plaintiff should have been identified in the petition's caption as Credit Bureau of North Platte, Inc., the defect caused no prejudice because the petition alleged the corporation's identity and the defendant failed to object before trial; the error was therefore waived.
- The evidence was sufficient to support the judgment because the plaintiff proved the account, Gary Coble's payments, and the assignment of the account, and the defendant offered no evidence.
Key quotations
“The defendant's failure to timely object waived any error based on the defect in the caption.” (264 N.W.2d at 687)
“The evidence was sufficient for the trier of fact to conclude that the defendant was indebted to the plaintiff in the amount of the judgment.” (264 N.W.2d at 687)
Factual background
The account arose from merchandise sold by Miller & Paine to Janet Coble between August 13 and October 24, 1969. Miller & Paine assigned the account to Professional Collection Service on September 25, 1971, and Gary Coble later made eight payments totaling $189.66. The plaintiff proved the account, the payments, and the assignment, while Gary Coble offered no evidence.
Procedural history
Professional Collection Service sued Gary and Janet Coble in county court on an account for merchandise purchased from Miller & Paine. Janet Coble was not served and did not appear. The county court entered judgment, and Gary Coble appealed to the District Court; that appeal was later dismissed for lack of prosecution. The District Court sustained a motion for new trial filed by both defendants and entered a reduced judgment against both defendants. Gary Coble appealed to the Nebraska Supreme Court, which affirmed.