Mills v. Fortune
North Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from District Court, Burleigh county; Glaspell, J. Action (by I. E. Mills against Thomas Fortune. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. The procedure in taking up estrays is ex parte and in invitum and the statutory requirements must be strictly pursued. If defendant was not qualified to take up the estray when he did, or failed in pursuing the statutory requirements, he was a trespasser.
Read the full summary
Appeal from District Court, Burleigh county; Glaspell, J. Action (by I. E. Mills against Thomas Fortune. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. The procedure in taking up estrays is ex parte and in invitum and the statutory requirements must be strictly pursued. If defendant was not qualified to take up the estray when he did, or failed in pursuing the statutory requirements, he was a trespasser. Section 1576, Rev. Codes 1899; James v. Fowler, 90 Ind. 563; Bucher v. Wagoner, 14 N. W. 160; Weber v. Hartman, 7 Col. 13; Dierks v. Weilage, 24 N. W. 728. Defendant took up the estray…
1Opinion of the CourtEngerud, J.
This is an action of replevin for a horse of which plaintiff is admitted to be the owner. The plaintiff claims that he took and retains possession of the horse as an estray, and has a lien on the animal to the extent of $25, which he asserts is a reasonable charge for the trouble and expense of keeping it. There was a tidal before a jury, and a verdict for defendant. A motion for a new trial was denied, and plaintiff appeals from the judgment. Besides specifying numerous errors of law, the appellant also, toy proper specifications, challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to justify the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Stewart v. HunterOregon Supreme Court · 1888
- McCrossin v. DavisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1892
3Cited by4 opinions
- Nielsen v. HylandUtah Supreme Court · 1918
- Jorgenson v. StoryMontana Supreme Court · 1927
- Hess v. UdyUtah Supreme Court · 1919
- Laporte v. Van BuskirkNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1927