Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1918-06-21
Attorney for Company Goes
Into History of the Case
No Reflection on Steen in
This Matter, He Says, and
Any State Officer Who
Uses Such Arguments
Does So from Lack of
knowledge or With an VI
terror Motive.

J. F. Sullivan of Mandan, attorney
for the Des Moines Mutual Hail &
Cyclone Insurance association, has
made public a letter written to ]. p.
Reeve Of Beach, in response to this
gentleman's inquiry anent the history
Of the case against this company in
stttuted by the state to retain the in
terest on $4,000 deposit with the
state treasurer, as required by law
before the company could operate in
this state.
The letter follows:
Mandan. N. D., June 10, 1918.
Mr.. ]. P. Reeve, Beach. N. Oak.
My Dear Reeve:
Answering your inquiry as to the
status Of the ase OF Des Moines Mu-
tual Hail & Cyclone Insurance asDo-
citation against John Steen as reasur-
er Of the state Of North Dakota, and
John Steen individually, and the state
Of North Dakota. will say that the
history Of this litigation is simple.
The plaintiff in this action put up
with the state treasurer. under sec
ton 1896, Compiled Laws Of North
Dakota for the year 1913. $4,000 in
cash, which was held by the state
treasurer for some time under that,
act, and the company subsequently
went out of business in this state and
the deposit was returned to them. AS
you know. it is not the policy Of the
keep the actual $25 5000 in gold in a
safe, nor is it considered advisable to
do SO. and to get away from this ex-
ira hazard, Steen very properly de-
posted the money in various banks
on certificates Of deposit drawing 4
per cent interest. The treasurers
bond, Of course, being ample protec-
ton to the state thereon. i
After this $3.50 had been taken
out Of the state by the insurance COM
pany. which vas after they had fully
complied with the law and had paid
up the claims outstanding against
them, etc., which included certain
claims which this Office held. it oc-
Cured to the writer that the insur-
ance company would be entitled to re-
ceive the interest that was was earn
ed on the money while it was on de-
post. We made a demand upon the
state treasurer for this Interest, which
amounted to something in the neigh
borhood Of $1,25e.00, and that origin
al demand IL what started this entire
litigation. 1T.
IAnde's Opinion.
At that time the Honorable Henry
J, Linde was attorney general, and
my recollection Of the matter is that
Steen submitted this matter to the
attorney general for an opinion. I am
not sure as to just what opinion
Linde gave to Mr.. steen, but I am
sure that after the matter had been
discussed for some little time. MI.
Linde told me himself that he was
satisfied that under the law that all
the state was entitled to was the $25.-
$25, 900 on deposit during the period
covered by the statute, and that Il tho
state saw fit to put it out on interest,
that to the extent Of the interest col
lected that either John Steen or the
insurance company would be entitled
to that interest.
OF course, the idea Of demanding
this interest was somewhat novel,
and all Of US at that time. including
Steen. both as an individual and as
state treasurer, and including Mr..
Linde, had agreed that the matter
should be submitted to the court In a
short and concise manner, and I be-
lieve that the understanding at that
made.
Soo60 Is 6G8k0OC0kOTs NJ r
Theodore Koffel was and I believe
still is, Mr.. Stems personal legal adj
visor. and after our demand was
made, KofEel was asked by Mr.. Steen,
I believe, or In my event came Into
the action for Mr.. Steen, and W had
this situation: We. for the insurance
company, were Of the opinion that
the insurance company was entitled
to this interest; Linde believed that
John Stesn personally OF tho insur-
ance company should receive 1t, but
felt that the interests Of the state to
the money, IL 1t had any, should be
submitted to the court for decision:
Koffel was Of the opinion that, Mr..
steen was in the capacity Of q stake
holder, and submitted that Mr.. Steen.
in whatever capacity the court should
And, was holding the money either
e. an Individual or ~ state treasurer,
and ! was ready, able and willing to
pay the money to whomsoover the
court. should md to be entitled
thereto, but In view Of the fact that
the interest was earned through the
business agacity and good judgment
Of MI. Steen In putting II out 1t In
[teres4. and In view Of the fact thAf
the responsibility therefor was upon
IHteen 1t all times. tha4 the question
tof whether Or not eteen ~ m indivtd-