The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1925-11-04
From Divide County

From Divide County
Henry Espeseth, Plaintiff and Ap-
pellant, VS.. w. J. Hayes, individually
and as Sheriff, ". l. Peterson ard I.
+. Lynch. Deputy Sheriffs, Defend
ants and Respondents.
!. A taxpayer who does not pay
his personal property tax, conceded
~ due and delinquent, because of
the the collecting officer as to the
charged, lis not entitled to equitable
relief against the collection thereof
by distress and sale. where he has
neither paid nor rendered the amount
Of the tax and costs properly charge
able. ,...
Appeal from the District Court of
Divide County, Hon. John c. Lowe,
Judge ..~
Affirmed. ......
Opinion Of the court by Nuess!e, J.
E. J. McIlraith, Of Crosby, Attorney
for Appellant. ...s...s.,
G. S. Wooiedgc, Of Minot, Attorney
for Respondents.
From Burleigh County
Company "a" First Regiment North
Dakota National Guard Training
School, a. corporation, Plaintiff and
Respondent. VS.. Edmund A. Hughes,
Defendant and Appellant.
SYLLABUS: ~
% In an action in conversion,
where the evidence goes to establish
an original tortiOus taking OF the
property converted it is not essential
| to make or prove q demand for re-
turn Of the property. ....... -.
(2) Where the evidence offered to
| sustain plaintiffs contention upon a
| question Of fact in 2 case, is substan-
| tial, and is admitted, or is not dis
puted or controvcrted by substantial
| evidence in the case, and plaintiff
evidence and the differences, AZ any,
which fairly and reasonably may be
| drawn therefror., point to but one
=, conclusion. and is of such Il charac-
| ter that fair and reasonable minds
could not differ as to the conclusion
to be reached therefrpm, there is no
question Of fact or issue Of fact upon
such question to be submitted to the
jury.
! 49, a witness who has had charge
Of personal property for upwards of
four years, Immediately prior to the
taking by another, who had seen the
property frequently during that time,
had checked it over Il number of
times, who had knowledge Of it's con-
dition, its state of repair, its usabil-
ity, its seryiceability, the cost Of re-
placements, who knew or had inform
ed himself Of the cost Of such prop
erty, and who testified he knew the
reasonable value Of the property at
the time and place Of the taking
thereof, is competent and qualified
after such facts are laid before the
jury. to testify to the reasonable
value Of such property.
(4) In the absence of 4 market
therefor, the measure Of damages fol
the conversion Of pers onal property
is the reasonable value thereof at
the time when, and at the place
where, said property is converted.
60 For reasons stated in the opin.
ion. it is held, that the verdict in the
instant case is excessive and that ;
new trial must, be had unless the
plaintiff will consent TO- remission
of the amount stated in the opinion
Appeal from the District Court Of
Burleigh County. Hon. Charles f
Wolfe, Special Judge.
Modified and affirmed.
! Opinion of the Court by Pugh
Dist. ].
!! Johnson and Nuessle, j., being dis
qualified, did not participates; Pugl
and Berry, District Judges, sitting il
their stead. -
Burke, j., dissenting.
| Newton, Dullam & Young, Bis
i ~, o,..E ~ n nnj Ynror {, Ti11ntSo m
Bismarck, N. d., Attorneys for Ap
'pellant.
and Theodore Kofiel, Bismarck, N
d., Attorneys for Respondent.