Red River Valley Land Co. v. Harris
North Dakota Supreme Court
From a judgment of the District Court of Burleigh County, Nuessle, J., plaintiff appeals. “A person who gives to a worthless object the form and substance of something of value with the purpose and intent of setting afloat such worthless objects in the market's and channels of trade, knowing and intending that people will purchase, trade, and deal therein, paying out their money therefor, which money somebody must necessarily lose, is liable to anyone sustaining such loss or…
Read the full summary
From a judgment of the District Court of Burleigh County, Nuessle, J., plaintiff appeals. “A person who gives to a worthless object the form and substance of something of value with the purpose and intent of setting afloat such worthless objects in the market's and channels of trade, knowing and intending that people will purchase, trade, and deal therein, paying out their money therefor, which money somebody must necessarily lose, is liable to anyone sustaining such loss or damage.” Baker v. Hallam, 103 Iowa, 43, 72 N. W. 419; Bank v. Ward, 100 H. S. 195; Bank of Achison v. Beyers, 139 Mo.…
1Opinion of the CourtRobinson, J.
The plaintiffs are a small speculative corporation of Eargo, North Dakota. It is composed of John Mahon, C. W. Andrus, and others. This is an action based on fraud in the manufacture and sale of worthless tax deeds. The claim of plaintiff is that in April, 1912, by fraud and artifice, defendant, Harris, palmed off on them a lot of worthless tax deeds to neaxdy 10,000 acres of land in Tennessee, for which they paid 75 cents an acre, amounting to $7,135.37; and that their loss by reason of defective titles was $103,000 and interest. As the evidence shows, the plaintiffs secured the tax deeds…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Beavers v. WaltersNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1995
- Beavers v. WaltersNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1995
- Lindlots Realty Corp. v. County of SuffolkNew York Court of Appeals · 1938