Legal Opinion

Locken v. Locken

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided May 11, 2011No. 20100297PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KAPSNER, Justice.

[¶ 1] David Locken appeals from a summary judgment dismissing his action to determine his ownership interest in a *303tract of land in Dickey County. He argues his claim is not barred by the statute of limitations for an action on a contract for deed under N.D.C.C. § 28-01-42 and, therefore, is not barred by the Marketable Record Title Act, N.D.C.C. ch. 47-19.1. We hold David Locken’s claim is barred by the statute of limitations for an action on a contract for deed under N.D.C.C. § 28-01-42, because the due date of the last payment of the indebtedness secured by the contract for…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. County of Stutsman v. State Historical Society of North DakotaNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Diocese of Bismarck Trust v. Ramada, Inc.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Sauby v. City of FargoNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Jennings v. SchmitzSupreme Court of Iowa · 1945
  5. Clinton County v. CoxSupreme Court of Iowa · 1873

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Leno v. K & L Homes, Inc.North Dakota Supreme Court · 2011
  2. Estate of Christeson v. GilstadNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013
  3. Schwab v. ZajacNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2012
  4. Kittleson v. Grynberg Petroleum CompanyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2016
  5. Garaas v. Cass County Joint Water Resource DistrictNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2016

9 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