Legal Opinion

Peterson v. Bertilson

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided April 29, 1916Published

Erom a judgment of the District Court of Burke County, Leighton> J., plaintiff appeals. A pleading in a justice court is not required to be in any particular form' but must be so expressed as to enable a person of common understanding to know what is intended. It may be oral or written. Comp-. Laws 1913, §§ 9039, 9044. Proceedings before a justice of the peace should be construed with great liberality; substance, not form, being regarded. 12 Enc.

Read the full summary

Erom a judgment of the District Court of Burke County, Leighton> J., plaintiff appeals. A pleading in a justice court is not required to be in any particular form' but must be so expressed as to enable a person of common understanding to know what is intended. It may be oral or written. Comp-. Laws 1913, §§ 9039, 9044. Proceedings before a justice of the peace should be construed with great liberality; substance, not form, being regarded. 12 Enc. PI. & Pr. 695; Ilelsey v. Chicago & N. W. R. Co. 1 S. D. 80, 45 N. W. 205 ; Hanson v. Gronlie, 17 N. D. 191, 115 N. W. 666; Jerome v. Rust, 19 S. D.…

1Opinion of the CourtChristianson, J.

This action was originally commenced in the justice court of Burke county. The justice issued a summons which, omitting certain formal parts, was in words and figures as follows:

The State of North Dakota Sends Greetings to Said Defendant: You are hereby summoned to appear before me at my office in the city of Bowbells, in said county, on the 12th day of April, 1912, at 10 o’clock in the forenoon of said day, to answer the complaint of the above-named plaintiff, who claims to recover of you the sum of one hundred seventy-six dollars and twenty-five cents, for work, labor, and services…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Whitney v. RitzNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Wilcox v. Toledo & Ann Arbor RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
  3. Swineford v. PomeroyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1863
  4. Hanson v. GronlieNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1908
  5. Sinkling v. Illinois Central Railway Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1898

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