Bismarck weekly tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1884-1943, 1891-07-17
b GREEK.
Brien, RI Ryal

AoSoos
Flanagan, CT Holman, IS
Tibbils, lib Pennell, b
In the Supreme Court.
Two decisions were filed in the su-
preme court yesterday. The first came
up from Stark county, Hon. W. H. Win
chester, Judge. John B. Campbell and
John B. and w. H. Sanborn of st. Paul
appeared for the plaintiff, and Leslie A
Simpson for the defendant. In the ap-
pellate court Mr.. Simpson did not argue
the case. The trial court gave judgment
for the defendant and this is reversed
and affirmative relief granted the plant
if without ordering a new trial. The
case is National German-American bank
vs.. Gregor Lang, and the syllabus is as
follows:
Where q litigant desires to take ad-
vantage of the laws of another state it is
incumbent upon him to show by roper
averments what such laws are and where
in they differ from those of this state. If
he fails to do so, it is error to admit tes-
timony at the trial as to what the foreign
law is. In the absence of allegation and
proof to the contrary, the courts will pre-
sumo that the foreign law is the same as
that of the forum
The defendant for value made and de-
livered to plaintiff an obligation in the
following form:
$1,000. 18th March, 1889.
Ninety days after date I promise to
pay to the National German bank, St.
Paul, at the bank, st. Paul, the sum of
twelve hundred dollars, value received.
GREGoR LANG.
At the trial plaintiff put this paper in
evidence together with evidenc showing
the amount of interest which had &C
crued after the paper matured, figured
the defendants motion the district court
nonsuited the plaintiff and directed a
verdict for the defendant. Held, error.
The instrument contains all the essen.
tials of a promissory note and while the
phrase, viz, son account of the RANCH"
is superfuous, it does not relieve the de-
PENDANT of his personal liability to pay
the note, nor pnrport to do 30.
Defendants answer stated in SUBJ
stance that while the defendant person
ally made and delivered the note and
received the money therefor from plain
tiff that the money so received was to be
used for the benefit of one P, whose
agent the defendant was; that the plain
tiff was informed when the note was
made that the money was to be used in
d%efraying the expense Of operating a
ranch belonging to P. and that P.
himself assented to the giving of the
note. Held, that the answer failed to
state any defense. The answer does not
state that P. at any time orally agreed to
pay the note, but if such agreement had
been made it would be inadmissible in
evidence to vary and contradict the ex-
press terms of the written agreement.
Held further, where an agent contracts
in behalf of his principal he must do so
\ in the name of the principal. If the
II agent contracts in his own name he alone
n lis bound.
Opinion by Judge Bartholomew,
Judge Wallin conourring. Chief Justice
Corllss in concurring expresses no opin-
ion on the point that the law of the
jurisdiction where a contract is made or
to be performed is, in the absence of
\ proof to the contrary, presumed to be
the same as the laws of the forum, so far
as statute law is concerned.
The other case is Yerkes vs.. Crum, on
appeal from Cass county, Hon. VIM. B.
Mcconnell, Judge. Messrs. Stone,
Newman & Resser appeared for the
plaintiff and J. E. Robinson contra. The
complaint states in this action that the
plaintiff was the owner of q certain lot
in Fargo by virtue of a sherif's deed on
foreclosure Of mortgage given by the
former owners to Mr.. Yerkes. He
brought action to declare a tax deed null
and void, which deed was held by the
defendant herein. Crum was attorney
for the mortgagors and the plaintiff
claimed he secured a title antagonistic
to his client and hence that the ~transac-
tion was null and void. The trial court
gave judgment for the plaintiff on the
pleadinRs and Crum appeals. In his
answer Crum denied being the attorney
9 + the mortgagors at the time
he secured the tax deed
in question. The supreme
court reversed the judgment and sends
u back for new trial on this material.
point, the opinion holding that, L heWpass
sssssa SS5s s