Legal Opinion

Stuart v. Secrest

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided September 25, 1969No. 8534PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STRUTZ, Judge,

on reassignment.

The plaintiff brings this action against the defendant to recover money claimed to be due on contract. The case was tried to the court without a jury. From a judgment entered for the defendant dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint, the plaintiff takes this appeal, demanding trial de novo.

Both parties are attorneys at law, licensed to practice in this State. The plaintiff also was a member of the National Guard, and his unit had been called into active service for a period of one year commencing November 1, 1961. Realizing that he would be absent from his office…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Stetson v. Investors Oil, Inc.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1966
  2. Shimek v. VogelNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1960
  3. Delzar Construction Co. v. New Marian Homes Corp.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Alm Construction Company v. VertinNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1962

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Cherne Industrial, Inc. v. Grounds & Associates, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
  2. Tallackson Potato Co., Inc. v. MTK Potato Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Metcalf v. Security International Insurance Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Bismarck Realty Co. v. FoldenNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Kruger v. SoreideNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1976

8 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