The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1914-02-16
Decisions of the Supreme Court

ages against the plaintiff under the
contract, but he merely plead and
proved such actual damages, as far as
fensive matter tending to show a want
Of equity in plaintiffs claim.
(Syllabus by the court.) Appeal
from district court, Nelson county, C.
F. Templeton, J.. From an order
granting a new trial. defendant ap-
peals. Reversed. Opinion Of the
court by Fisk, J., Goss and Burke,
J. j., dissenting. Scott Rex, Grand
Forks. N. D.. for defendant and ap-
pellant. Erich & Kelly, Lakota. N.
D.. for plaintiff and respondent.
F. A. Patrick & Co, plaintiff and ap~
pellant, a corporation, VS.. Edwin Fl.
Knapp and Emil O. Fonkalsrud, CO.
partners as Knapp & Fonkalsrud, de-
PENDANTS, and A. Hilliard, ~intervenor,
respondents.
The owner Of a certain business
block assigned the future rents to one
H. Later plaintiff obtained judgment
against the wne Of the premises and
sold the same upo execution, This
action is to determine the rights to the
rents subsequent to the sale. Fl. was
also the holder of a prior mortgage.
under which he sold the premises six
months after the said execution sale.
The rights of the mortgage to the
rents after his sale are also in dis
pute.
1. Upon the sale under the exc
cution, the purchasers became the
owners Of the premises, subject to the
mortgage of Fl. and subject to the
various rights of redemption. In the
absence Of q redemption the purchas-
er's title dates from the sale. Under
section 714S r, c. 1905 such purchas-
err is entitled to the rents from the
time Of the sale. AS the owners in
terest in the Ian was entinguished by
the sale, her assignment Of the rents
given H. was also extinguished and
the purchaser was entitled to the same
until his interest in turn was extin-
guished by sale upon the mortgage
held by H. Authorities collected and
digested.
/ 2. After the sale to H. under his
mortgage he in turn was entitled to
receive the rents.
(Syllabus by the court.)
Appealed from the district court of
Stark county, Crawford, J.
Judgment modified and affirmed.
Opinion of the court by Burke, J.
! Thomas H. Pugh Of Dickinson. N.
D., attorney for plaintiff and appellant.
w. F. Burnett Of Dickinson, N. D.
dItOTilSy lOl u~SlGIOdAIS anu tAbSE ven
or and respondents. ....-' 49,. tai
A. B. Hermann, plaintiff and re-
spondent, VS.. Minnesota Elevator Co.,
a corporation. defendant and appel
liant.
/. Evidence examined and held, that
one T. raised the crop in litigation as
q holdover under a prior written lease,
section 5531 r. C. 1905 governing in
the case.
2. Evidence examined and held, that
no division of the grain was made
prior to the sale thereof to the de-
PENDANT elevator company. Bidgood
". elevator company, 8 N. D. 627. cited
and followed.
8. Certain conversations and state
ments with and by the officers of the
bank which owned the land, examined
and held. not binding upon the defend
ant elevator company. Judgment
should have ben directed in favor Of
the defendant. -. $50.
(Syllabus by the conrt.) -.....
Appealed from the county court Of
Benson county, Lilies, j.
Reversed. ~. IT,
Opinion Of the court by Burke, J.
+. B. Lambert of Minot, N. D., at.
torney for defendant and appellant.
' Flynn & Traynor of Devils Lake, N
D., attorneys for plaintiff and respond.
ant. rt E@a saE E-a# Hr-f s