Baldwin v. Timber Investment Co.
North Dakota Supreme Court
'Appeal from the District Court of Cass County, Honorable Chas. ■A. Polloch, Judge. The rule is well settled that one cannot faithfully serve two masters whose interests are diverse. Andrews v. Pratt, 44 Cal. 309; San Diega v. S. D. L. A. R. Co. 44 Cal. 106; Wilbur v. Lunde, 49 Cal. 290 (19 Am.
Read the full summary
'Appeal from the District Court of Cass County, Honorable Chas. ■A. Polloch, Judge. The rule is well settled that one cannot faithfully serve two masters whose interests are diverse. Andrews v. Pratt, 44 Cal. 309; San Diega v. S. D. L. A. R. Co. 44 Cal. 106; Wilbur v. Lunde, 49 Cal. 290 (19 Am. Rep. 645); Cumberland Coal & I. Co. v. Sherman, 30 Barb. 553; Jackson v. Ludeling, 21 Wall. 616. The making of the notes was a fraud on the stockholder and the burden of proof shifts to the plaintiff to show that there was good faith in the entire transaction. First Nat. Bank v. Flath, 10 N. D. 283;…
1Opinion
On Petition for Rehearing.
Birdzell, J.
A petition for rehearing has been filed, which is addressed principally to some propositions advanced in a short concurring opinion prepared by the writer and concurred in by the then Chief Justice Bruce, The statements in the opinion to which they petition for rehearing is directed were made with reference to the facts in the particular case, although this perhaps does not sufficiently appear. • Since the petition for rehearing was filed, the whole case has been submitted on the briefs to District Judge Hanley, sitting in the place, of Mr. Chief Justice…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Coit v. Gold Amalgamating Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1886
- First National Bank v. Gustin Minerva Consolidated Mining Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- Coit v. North Carolina Gold Amalgamating Co.United States Circuit Court · 1882
- Railroad v. KnoxvilleTennessee Supreme Court · 1896
- Burrows v. . SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1853
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.