Hinsey v. Alcox
North Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, Honorable W. L. Nuessle, Judge. In a local action the venue is always in the county where the property is located. This is a local action, and could not have occurred anywhere except in the county where the real estate is located. Comp.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, Honorable W. L. Nuessle, Judge. In a local action the venue is always in the county where the property is located. This is a local action, and could not have occurred anywhere except in the county where the real estate is located. Comp. Laws 1913, § 7415, subdiv. 1, § 7418; Dhooghe v. Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. 91. Neb. 613, 136 N. W. 1075, and cases cited; Barbour v. Fidler, 31 S. D. 351, 141 N. W. 88; Small v. Gilruth, 8 S. D. 287, 66 N. W. 452. This action is based upon a written undertaking in attachment proceedings, and brought to…
1Opinion of the CourtGrace, J.
The question here presented involves the place of trial of a civil action, a demand for a change of venue for the trial of such action having been made and served prior to the time fixed by law for the defendant to answer the complaint of the plaintiff; to wit, thirty days had expired.
' The complaint alleges a cause of action against H. O. Alcox, as principal, and Edwin A. Engebretson and John E. McGibbon, as sureties, who were principal and sureties on an attachment bond. At the time of bringing the action in which the warrant of attachment was issued and the attachment bond was given, the…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Ott v. KelleyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1934
- American State Bank of Dickinson v. HoffeltNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1975
- Johnson v. TomlinsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1968
- Clark v. ClevelandNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1931
- State v. BloomNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1922
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.