Legal Opinion

Belmont v. Gentry

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided December 29, 1933No. File No. 7604PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRudolph, P. J.

The plaintiffs have appealed from an order sustaining a demurrer to the complaint on the grounds that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The complaint alleges that the Hill City Bank, being insolvent on July 18, 1932, suspended business and- was taken in charge by the superintendent of banks; that thereafter, pursuant to the provisions of chapter 90, Laws of 1931, an order was made by the circuit court of Pennington county removing the liquidation of the -bank from the control of the superintendent of banks, and placing the liquidation thereof under…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Smith v. OlsonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1926
  2. In re Beachy & Co.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1909
  3. Joseph T. Ryerson & Son v. PedenIllinois Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Hodde v. NobbeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1920
  5. Jesson v. NoyesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1917

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. American Casualty Co. of ReadingSupreme Court of Colorado · 1993
  2. Himrich v. WalterSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Belmont v. GentrySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Belmont v. GentrySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. American Casualty Co. of ReadingSupreme Court of Colorado · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API