Strobeck v. McWilliams
North Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of Sargent County, Honorable Frank P. Allen, Judge. Isolated and disconnected sales of land, without regard to the location of the land or the residence of the parties, does not amount to engaging in business in violation of a contract in which the parties agreed not to engage in the real estate, farm, loan, etc., business. The terms, “engage in business” and “carry on business,” are synonomous expressions.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of Sargent County, Honorable Frank P. Allen, Judge. Isolated and disconnected sales of land, without regard to the location of the land or the residence of the parties, does not amount to engaging in business in violation of a contract in which the parties agreed not to engage in the real estate, farm, loan, etc., business. The terms, “engage in business” and “carry on business,” are synonomous expressions. Graves v. Knight, 199 N. T. 397, 92 N. E. 792; United States v. Jackson, 26 Fed. 556; State v. Nopin, 41 S. E. 13; Guiltinan v. National L. Ins. Co. 38 At].…
1Opinion of the CourtRobinson, J.
In September, 1913, the defendants and one Mott owned the Cogswell State Bank. The defendants owned nearly all the bank stock, consisting of 150 shares. In connection with the hank business, and as a part of the business, there was done a real estate, farm, loan, and insurance business. Pursuant to a written agreement defendants sold to the plaintiff the entire stock of the bank at $260 a share, and agreed to this covenant: “In selling the stock of the bank it is understood, and the sellers agree, that the good will is included, and that they will not engage in the banking business here, nor…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Mandan-Bismarck Livestock Auction v. KistNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1957
- Adalex Laboratories, Inc. v. KrawitzSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1954
- Farmers Union Oil Co. v. KilgoreNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1941
- King v. County of StarkNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1936
- Viestenz v. Arthur TownshipNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1952
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.