Legal Opinion

Farmers' State Bank v. Van Houten

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided April 21, 1928No. File No. 5736PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

Defendant, Van Houten, was indebted to James River Bank on a note for $2,400, due March I, 1922, with interest at 10 per cent, which was secured by a chattel mortgage. In September, 1922, by a written agreement, defendant authorized and directed the mortgagee to sell the property at public auction without formal foreclosure, in order to avoid the expense and loss incident to foreclosure, and apply the proceeds on the mortgage debt, accounting to Van Houten for the surplus, if any. This same egreement was considered in James River Bank v. Hansen, 51 S. D. 13, 211 N. W. 976. Pursuant to this…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Minneapolis Threshing Machine Co. v. CalhounSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Karlen v. TrebbleSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1922
  3. F. B. Scott Co. v. ScheidtNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1916
  4. Nelson v. BadkerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1917
  5. James River Bank v. HansenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1927

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Midzak v. MidzakSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Calmenson Clothing Co. v. First National Bank & Trust Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Farmers' & Merchants' State Bank v. DoeringSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Barkley v. BoardmanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1928
  5. Krueger v. Central Lbr. Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1930

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API