Click image to open full size in new tab
Article Text
Appeal from the district court of Divide county, Lowe J., defendants appeal.
Reversed and dismissed. Opinion of the court by Christianson, Ch. J. Olaf Braateliep, state's attorney, Divide county, and H. W. Braatelien, assistant state's attorney, Divide county, both of Crosby, N. D., attorneys for appellants county commissioners. Geo. P. Homnes, Crosby, N. D., attorney for respondents other than county commissioners.
From Sargent County
L. R. Baird, as receiver of the Cogswell State bank of Cogswell, North Dakota, plaintiff and respondent, vs. G. L. Strobeck, defendant and appellant.
Syllabus: Section 5188, C. L. 1913, which provides that "every banking corporation in this state shall be exempt from the legal process of attachment or execution;" but that "if any bank fails, neglects or refuses to pay any invalid final judgment or decree that may be rendered against it the state banking board shall declare such bank insolvent or in failing circumstances and shall forthwith cause a receiver to be appointed to wind up its affairs," construed; and it is held, that a judgment against a bank directing the payment of money does not become lien upon real property owned by the bank.
From a judgment of the district court of Sargent county, Wolfe J., defendant appeals. Affirmed. Opinion of the court by Christianson, Ch. J. Lauder & Lauder, attorneys for appellant. Conmy, Young & Burnett, of Fargo, N. D., for respondent.
From Richland County
Farmers National Bank of Lidgerwood, North Dakota, a corporation, plaintiff and appellant, vs. Donald Wright et al, defendants; R. V. McMichael, respondent.
Syllabus: 1. Amercement proceedings are summary in character; the evidence should be clear and convincing; and the record should not present substantial doubts, as to the propriety of amercing the officer, arising because of the conduct of the plaintiff which may have caused the failure to make a timely return. If such failure was induced by the plaintiff, or otherwise caused by him, or if the whole case leaves the court in doubt upon the subject, a cause of action in amercement cannot be predicated on the delinquency, and it is proper to refuse to make an order amercing the officer.
Appeal from the district court of Richland county, Hon. Chas. E. Wolfe, Judge.
The order is affirmed. Opinion of the court by Johnson, J. Lauder & Lauder, and Purcell & Heder, Wahpetop, North Dakota, attorneys for appellant. Forbes, Lounsbury & Forbes, Wahpeton, North Dakota, and W. L. Divet, Wahpeton, North Dakota, attorneys for respondent.
Original
The State of North Dakota on the relation of F. F. Burchard et al, relators, vs. Robert E. Byrne, as secretary of state of the state of North Dakota, respondent.
Syllabus: Petitions of aspirants for nomination at a primary election under the provisions of section 853, C. L. 1913, may be presented to the secretary of state through the agency of postal or express facilities. Such presentation is sufficient if a delivery of such petitions is made by mail or express in the usual manner to so some agent of the secretary of state authorized to receive mail or express within the time prescribed by the statute.
Held, for reasons stated in the opinion, that in the instant case a delivery of petitions by an express company to the board of administration of the state of North Dakota was a delivery to the secretary of state through an agent authorized to receive the same, and therefore a presentation within the meaning of that term as used in the statute.
Original application for a writ of mandamus.
Writ granted. Opinion of the court by Nuessle, J.; Christianson, Ch. J., dissenting. S. L. Nuchols and F. O. Hellstrom of Bismarck, N. Dak., attorneys for relators. George F. Shafer, attorney general, and John Thorpe, assistant attorney general of Bismarck, N. Dak., attorneys for respondents.
From Nelson County
Peoples State bank of Aneta, a
