Presho State Bank v. Northwestern Milling Co.
South Dakota Supreme Court
On rehearing. (1) Under point one of the opinion, Appellant submitted that; Failure to comply with court rules should operate as a mis-trial, giving each party on re-trial a right to contest for legal rights, but should not operate to deprive appellant of right to request instructions, except to refusal to give them, and to take exceptions to charge in manner provided by rule for settlement of charge.
Read the full summary
On rehearing. (1) Under point one of the opinion, Appellant submitted that; Failure to comply with court rules should operate as a mis-trial, giving each party on re-trial a right to contest for legal rights, but should not operate to deprive appellant of right to request instructions, except to refusal to give them, and to take exceptions to charge in manner provided by rule for settlement of charge. Respondent cited: 3 C. J. 689; 'McPherson v. Julius, 17 S. D. 122, 95 N. W. 434; Reed v. Boland, 31 S. D. 316.
1Opinion of the Court
PER 'GURIAIM.
Respondent, criticizing the opinion of this court reported in Presho State Bank v. Northwestern Milling Co., 45 S. D. 58, 185 N. W. 370, prays for a rehearing. We refer to such opinion for an understanding of the question passed upon. Respondent, basing its argument upon two statutes of this state—R. C. 1919, § 47, “Acquiescence in error takes away the right of objecting to it,” and R. C. 1919, § 46, “He who consents to an act is not wronged by it”' — most strenuously contends that such sections are controlling’ in this case, and that this court erred in reversing the trial court…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Presho State Bank v. Northwestern Milling Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1921
3Cited by1 opinion
- Hovland v. CookSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1934