Legal Opinion · Dissent

Fox v. Nelson

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided April 27, 1915Published

Appeal from the District Court of Benville County, Leighton, J. Action of subsequent lien holder to redeem from the redemption of a lien holder. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the District Court of Benville County, Leighton, J. Action of subsequent lien holder to redeem from the redemption of a lien holder. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appeals. Statement of facts by Bruce, J. This is an action to redeem real estate from a mortgage sale which was made on the 29th day of July, 1911, and from the defendant, as a redemptioner, who redeemed from such sale on or about the 10th day of June, 1912. It appears that the title to the land was originally in E. W. Mattern, and that on the 8th day of November, 1906, Mattern and his wife mortgaged the land in…

1Dissent

Christianson, P.

(further dissenting). Since the foregoing dissent was prepared, a concurring opinion has been written by Justice Goss for the conceded purpose of discussing the dissenting opinion. This procedure is, to say the least, somewhat anomalous, as I believe the books will be searched in vain for another instance where a majority *625bas found it necessary to defend its decision, and I sincerely hope that this procedure will not be deemed a precedent to be followed by this court in the future. This extraordinary proceeding is of itself an admission of the weakness of the conclusions…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Shank v. GroffWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Brown v. SmithNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Daughdrill v. SweeneySupreme Court of Alabama · 1867
  4. Clark v. NeumannNebraska Supreme Court · 1898

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

Powered by the Exa API