Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1907-10-17
THURSDAY, Oct. 18th.


Wright for defendant and appellant;
M. G. spicer and Geo. b. Gibson
contra. 2s$t IL SS
Aber VS.. Twichell, as sheriff of Casss
county, from Cass county. Turner &c
Wright for defendant and appellant;
Barnett & Richardson, and ]. Willy,
contra.
0 Muir vs.. Chandler, from Cass coun-
|5ty. R. NJ Pollock for plaintiff and
appellant; Barnett & Richardson,
contra. FL @
|Ss In the supreme court yesterday on
motion Of w. r.. Cochrane, Mr.. j. 4
Walseth, of Overly, was admitted on
certificate from the state Of Mime.
Sofa and on motion OF A. Z. Patter-
son, Mr.. j. IA. Miller. of Beach, was
admitted on certificate from South
Dakota. NJ
The first case called for argument
was entitled Buchanan vs.. Minneap-
oils Threshing Machine Co, and Is.
an appeal from a judgment entered
in the district court Of Foster county.
This was an action on a breach of
warranty in the working OF a thresh-
ing machine, which the plaintiff Bu-
chanan claimed failed to do proper
work. He had paid for the same
with his promissory note, which had
been in turn transferred by the
! threshing company to an innocent
| purchaser Suit was brought on the
mote and Buchanan paid the same,
then suing the machine company for
4 the amount thus pand, receiving
| jud gment below. About 81 900 in in
yolved. Turner & Wright appeared
for the machine company and Attor-
ney General McCue and s.. E. Ellis
worth contra.
State of North Dakota VS.. School
District No. so, Barnes county, is an
action by the state to recover the face
4 value and in terest on bonds in the
warrant Indebtedness for school Ilous-
es. The defendant denied the val
/ idity Of the bonds on the ground that
/ they were not signed by the school
I district clerk; that the bonds were
never authorized by the school di-
rectors; that no election was held to
4 authorize the same and that as a
i matter of fact the district had less
i than % inhabitants and under no cir
cumstances could legally issue a
/ bond. hese various contentious were
upheld by Judge Burke and the state
4 has appealed Assistant Attorney
4 General Miller argued the matter for
i the state and Turner & Wright Tor
! the district. The bonds are now own
ed by the permanent school fund Of
q the state.
4 Owens VS.. Doughty comes from Eos.
4 ter county and involves the pay fol
y a car of tanning mills and judgment
was rendered below for the compan.
B furnishing the same. Attorney Gen,
eral McCue appeared for the defen
ant and Turner & Wright in opposi
ton.
p Two decisions were filed and thu
B following is the syllabus of each
Deardoff VS.. Thorstenson.
In an appeal to the district cour
3 from Judgment rendered in Justice
court. the filing Of an undertaken.
& with the. clerk of the district cour
within thirty days after the rendi
ton of the judgment Is srere
q auisite of jurisdiction to the distrie
& court.
y The filing OF an undertaking i
such cases pertains to the i,lrisdie
6 ton of the district court over tn
cause and subject matter of the ar
peal and cannot be waived by cor
sent Of the appellee in submitting
to the jurisdiction Of the distris
!. court
j Appeal from the district court (
Wells county; Hon. s. u. Glaspol
judy
Ass Plinn Fl. Woodward for appellan
H. j. Sessesen for respondent.
Judgment reversed
Opinion BY Morgan, county judg
ALI concur.
Powers Elevator Company VS.. Pottne
The provisions of chapter 101, Law
Of 1901, giving q lien to materia
men and laborers upon buildini
erected upon land occupied by be
2 sons pursuant to the land laws
the United States Ii germane to Il
i title to said law, being as regula
|. ing the filling foreclosure of 10
!. chanies' liens upon lands held or Q
: cupied under a filing under any
the land laws Of the United States
and does not confravene the pro,
ii sions Of section 81 Of the constit
II ton. providing that the subject Of !
act shall be expressed in Its title.