Renfeldt v. Brush-McWilliams Co.
North Dakota Supreme Court
Action of rescission in District Court, Ward County, Leighton, J. From a judgment of dismissal, the plaintiff has appealed and demands a trial de novo. An agreement, other than for necessities, made by a person when so drunk as to be incapable of understanding its nature and effect, is voidable at the intoxicated person’s option.
Read the full summary
Action of rescission in District Court, Ward County, Leighton, J. From a judgment of dismissal, the plaintiff has appealed and demands a trial de novo. An agreement, other than for necessities, made by a person when so drunk as to be incapable of understanding its nature and effect, is voidable at the intoxicated person’s option. Johnson v. Harmon, 94 H. S. 371, 24 L. ed. 271; Thackerah v. Haas, 119 U. S. 449, 30 L. ed. 486; Conley v. Nailor, 118 H. S. 127, 30 L. ed. 112, 6 Sup. Ct. Eep. 1001; Cecil v. St. Dennis, 14 Pa. 184; Straughan v. Cooper, 41 Okla. 515; French v. French, 8 Ohio, 214.…
1Opinion of the CourtBronson, J.
This is an action to rescind a contract, certain notes, and mortgages, upon grounds of intoxication. In the trial court, judgment was rendered dismissing the action. The plaintiff has appealed and demands a trial de novo. Substantially the facts are as follows:
The defendants are corporations, somewhat closely afiiliated, engaged in business in Minot. For some four years, prior to the transaction involved herein, the plaintiff had rented and farmed a large farm near Minot, leased to him through the defendants, Brush-McWilliams Company. This defendant was his financial adviser. For some time…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Spoonheim v. SpoonheimNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1905
- Power v. KingNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1909
3Cited by1 opinion
- Schantz v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1920