Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Fox v. Nelson

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided April 27, 1915Published

Appeal from the District Court of Benville County, Leighton, J. Action of subsequent lien holder to redeem from the redemption of a lien holder. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the District Court of Benville County, Leighton, J. Action of subsequent lien holder to redeem from the redemption of a lien holder. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appeals. Statement of facts by Bruce, J. This is an action to redeem real estate from a mortgage sale which was made on the 29th day of July, 1911, and from the defendant, as a redemptioner, who redeemed from such sale on or about the 10th day of June, 1912. It appears that the title to the land was originally in E. W. Mattern, and that on the 8th day of November, 1906, Mattern and his wife mortgaged the land in…

1ConcurrenceGoss, J.

I fully concur in the main opinion. My purpose is to discuss the dissent. This case comes here for trial de novo. But the pleadings and contentions presented below and here must largely shape our retrial. Doubtless the dissenting members *617could have tried the case more closely, and in proper season could have presented questions wholly unthought of, because foreign, to the theory of the case until found in their dissent. This applies to much that has been given great importance by them. Appellant has assumed that on September 10th Fox redeemed regularly and in strict accord with the statute,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. North Dakota Horse & Cattle Co. v. SerumgardNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1908
  2. Spackman v. GrossSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1910
  3. State ex rel. Brooks Bros. v. O'ConnorNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Brown v. SmithNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1904
  5. McDonald v. BeattyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1901

1 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