Nichols & Shepard Co. v. Horstad
South Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from Circuit Court, Codington County. Hon. Frank McNulty, Judge. Action by fhe Nichols & Shepard Company against Johannes Horstad and others, to recover upon an appeal bond. From a judgment for plaintiff, and from an order denying a new trial, defendants appeal. It was competent not only to’ show conversations that took place prior to the serving of the bond, but conversations that took place with Col.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Circuit Court, Codington County. Hon. Frank McNulty, Judge. Action by fhe Nichols & Shepard Company against Johannes Horstad and others, to recover upon an appeal bond. From a judgment for plaintiff, and from an order denying a new trial, defendants appeal. It was competent not only to’ show conversations that took place prior to the serving of the bond, but conversations that took place with Col. Stover as attorney for Nichols & Shepard Co. after the service of the bond upon him, .pertaining to the same subject matter and tending to show his prior knowledge of the intention in…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCOY, J.
This action was instituted to recover upon an appeal bond, and was before this court upon a former appeal (27 S. D. 262, 130 N. W. 776), and the rule of law announced -on that appeal became the law of this case. Under the former opinion, the issues of fact as to the general validity, force, and effect of said bond are confined to quite a narrow margin. This bond on its face constituted a stay bond; but defendants Addison and Sheldon contend that, at the time they executed said -bond, -they were advised, believed, and understood that it was only a cost bond, whereby they only obligated…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Nichols & Shepard Co. v. HorstadSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1911
- Bliss v. WaterburySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1914