Legal Opinion

Emanuel v. Engst

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided August 26, 1925PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNuessle, J.

This action is brought on a promissory note to recover the deficiency remaining after foreclosure and sale of the real estate security therefor.

The complaint sets out the making and securing of the note, the non-"payihent of'the same when due, the foreclosure of the security, the deficiency remaining, and the failure after demand to pav the same. The defendants, answering, admit the making and securing of the note, the nonpayment thereof, the foreclosure and the deficiency; but plead, first, that the note was void because the transaction out of which it grew was illegal, contrary to public…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Oscanyan v. Arms Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1881
  2. Trist v. ChildSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
  3. Guild v. MoreNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Fargo Gas & Coke Co. v. Fargo Gas & Electric Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1894
  5. Sonnesyn v. AkinNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1905

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Schneider v. SchaafNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1999
  2. West v. CarlsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Bentley v. Oldetyme Distillers, Inc.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1939
  4. Strom v. StromNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1956
  5. Zimprich v. ComanNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1931

2 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