The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1911-04-22
DECISIONS OF THE
SUPREME COURT


In the supreme court. state OF North
| Dakota, April. 1911, term. Joseph
LANCER, plaintiff and appellant. VS.. w.
II. G. Goode, defendant and respond
emit.
!. Section 2OSe OF the Revised Codes
of 1905 construed and held that no such
duty devolves upon any person to de-
stroy such noxious weeds as wild mus
tard upon the land he owns or occupies
as will make him liable in damages for
/ failure to destroy until after the coun-
| ty commissioners have prescribed the
time and manner OF destruction AS to
whether an action would lie after the
commissioners have acted, not deter
mined.
2. The expression rights OF an
other" In the maxim set forth in Sec
ton 1851 Of the Revised Codes of 1905
means legal rights. and is not broad
enough to include all rights determined
by our moral and ethical standards.
(Syllabus by the court.)
Appeal from district court, Cass
county; Pollock, j.
Action by Joseph LANCER as plaintiff,
against w. II. c. Goode as defendant
From an order sustaining demur-
rer to the complaint plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
J. F. Callahan and S. B. Bartlett, at
torneys for appellant.
Smith Stimmel, Pollock & Pollock
(of counseD, attorneys for respondent
Hon. A. @. Burr, Judge of the Ninth
Judicial district, sat in the hearing OF
the above entitled matter by request.
Opinion Of the court by Burr dis
trict Judge, all concurring except Nor
gan, O. J., not participating.
Hattie p. Harrington, plaintiff and
respondent, VS.. The Mutual Life In
surance Co. of New York, a corpora
ton, defendant and appellant.
1. Constituting section 594S OF the
revised codes Of 1905, held, That the
company cannot be permittedto show
that the actual date Of the issuance
of policy of life insurance was OF
later date than the date recited in
the contract, where the policy con-
ceipt Of the premium,
2. In such case, the date Of the
policy as specified in the contract be-
ing binding on the company. held, that
under the provisions of section 1854 OF
the revised codes OF 1905, the defense
that the insured committed suicide
cannot be set up when suicide occurred
after the expiration OF one year from
the date Of the policy.
8. Where the insured commits sui
eide while sane after the expiration
of one year from the date of the
policy, the company is liable for the
amount of the policy even though It
appeared that the act Of suicide was
premeditated before the expiration of
one year from the date OF the policy
and even though the date of the la
bility of the company is fixed by the
voluntary act Of the insured, this be-
| ing one of the risks assumed by the
company: whereas in this case the poll
| icy contains a provision that the COM
pany shall not be liable In the event.
of the insured's death by his own
act whether sane or insane during the
period, Of one year after the issuance
of the policy.
/ (Syllabus by the court.)
Appeal from district court. Grand
Forks county, Templeton, j.
Action by Hattie e. Harrington
against The Mutual Life Insurance Co.
Of New York, a corporation.
Judgment for plaintiff, defendant
appeals.
/ Affirmed.
Guy G. H. Corliss, for respondent.
Ball. Watson, Young & Lawrence.
for appellant
Opinion Of the court by Burr, dis
trict Judge, all concurring except Nor
gan, G. j., not participating
A. G. Burr, judge of the Ninth ju-
dicial district, sitting by request.