Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Tuttle v. Pollock

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided November 19, 1909Published

Original application by Ole B. Tuttle for mandamus to be directed to Charles A. Pollock, Judge of the Third Judicial District.

1ConcurrenceEllsworth, J.

I concur in the result and in the opinion generally, except upon the holding that mandamus is the only proper remedy to compel a trial court to settle a statement of the case when it wrongfully refuses so to do. On this point I am of the opinion that mandamus, while proper, is not under our statutes the exclusive, remedy.

Note — Supreme Court may compel a district judge to settle a statement of the case according to law. Kaeppler v. Pollock, 8 N. D. 59. Supreme Court can settle a statement of the case when the trial court refuses to “in accordance with facts.” Taylor v. Miller, 10 N. D. 361,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Kaeppler v. PollockNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Taylor v. MillerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1901

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API