The evening times. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1906-1914, 1913-03-28
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

August Harmening. respondent. vs.
John NJ. Rowland. appellant. {.
i. Where the complaint alleges
and the proof shows facts authorizing
a recovery for exemplary damages.
the same may be recovered under a
claim for damages generally without
being specifically pleaded. 1t is ac-
cordingly held, that the order permit
ting an amendment Of the complaint
at the trial with reference to eXen-
plary damages, was non-prejudicial.
2. An instruction placing the bur-
den upon the defendant to show his
good faith in doing the act complain
ed of. in the event the jury should find
that the relationship between the par
ties was that of attorney and client,
held. proper under the testimony.
3. At the trial certain original doc
uments in the United States land Of
flee and department of the interior.
which concededly were relevant and
material. were received in evidence
over defndant's OBJECTION that they
were incompetent for the reason that
they had not been properly authen-
ticated. The register Of the local land
office produced them in court and
identified them as original records of
ttlc ldu0 uCPdltIhShS iSsosAAf
land over which this controversy
arose. Held. that a sufficient founda-
ton was laid for the Introduction of
such original documents.
4. Subdivision s of section 1900,
r. c. 1905. and sections 2469 and 2470.
revised statutes Of the United states,
as amended by act of April 2. 1888.
construed and held. not to prescribe
an exclusive method of proving pub
~. o,,kc <horoin maintained The
original documents wnen properly
Identified as such. are the best evil
demo and tn statutes aforesaid were
not intended to prelude such proof.
s. Defendants contention that
there is no sufficient foundation in the
evidence to warrant the jury IN al
lowing exemplary damages. held.
without merit. there being ample tes-
timony tending to show that in COM
ant acted fraudulently and in total
disregard of plaintiffs rights. To
warrant exemplary damages proof of
actual malice Is not necessary in all
cases, and where the defendant.
through fraud and deceit, Intentionally
induced the plaintiff to believe and
to act upon the belief that certain
material representations were true.
when he knew to be false. he Is liable
for exemplary damages.
(Syllabus by the court).
Appeal from district court. Ward
county: K. E. Leighton. Judge.
Action by August Harmening
against John N. Rowland. From a
in plaintiffs favor. defend
appeals.
Affirmed.
opinion Of the court by Fisk. j.
In re Certain Disbarment Proceedings
in Case No. 2455.
Upon a motion to dismiss ccuea
tions in disbarment because the same
are verified upon information and be-
lief only. Held:
I. Where the ve%ri1cation Is in part
made upon positive knowledge 1t Is q
sufficient compliance with Section s07.
r. C. 1905. requiring such an accusa-
ton to be sworn to by the person
making It,"
2. A disbarment accusation present.
ed concerns a matter within the in
herent powers of the court: and IL the
accusation, in the discretion of the
court. is deemed sufficient to Justify
investigation. the proceedings so en-.
tertained will not be dismissed where
the verification Is not made entirely
upon positive knowledge of the facts
sworn to-.
3. Motion to dismiss is denied and
the accused directed to serve and file
his answer or demurrer to the accusa-
lions within thirty days.
(Syllabus by the court.)
Original proceedings in the supreme
court for disbarment.
Opinion by Goss. j.
State Of North Dakota. Appellant. vs.
Patrick McCiillic. Respondent.
The state appeals from an order