Legal Opinion · Dissent

Bumann v. Maurer

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided June 28, 1971No. Civ. 8722Published

1DissentTeigen, Judge

I dissent.

I believe that the certified questions should be answered by this court. The defendants have admitted legal liability by entering into a stipulation under the terms of which they admit the validity of the option agreement and agree to convey the property in accordance with all the requirements of the option with the single exception as to time. The majority, in outlining the facts and procedures in the trial court, correctly noted that:

“Just prior to the trial, the parties stipulated in open court that the Maurers would convey title to the land to the Bu-manns and that the only…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. City of Grand Forks v. Grand Forks CountyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1965
  2. State v. RobinsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1942
  3. State v. BonzerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1938
  4. State v. WallaNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1929
  5. Sylling v. Agsco Distributors, Inc.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1969

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

Powered by the Exa API