The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1926-06-11
Appeal from the district court of
divide county, Lowe j., defendants

Appeal from the district court of
Divide county; Lowe j.. defendants
appeal.
Reversed and dismissed. Opinion
of the court by Christianson, Oh. J..
Olaf Braateliep states attorney,
Divide county. and n. w. Braatelien.
assistant states attorney, Divide
county, both of Crosby, N. d., at
torneys for appellants county COM
missioners. Geo. p. Homnes, Crosby,
N. D., attorney for respondents other
than county commissioners.
From Sargent County
l.. r. Baird, as receiver Of the Cogs-
well State bank OF Cogswell, North
Dakota. plaintiff and respondent, vs..
G. l.. StfObeck, defendant and APP
pellant.
Syllabus: Section 1888, C.. l.. 1913,
which provides that "every banking
corporation in this state shall be
exempt from the legal process Of at
tachment or execution" hut that "if
any bank fails, neglccts or refuses
to pay any invalid final Judgment or
decree that may be rendered against
it the state banking board
shall declare such bank insolvent or
in failing circumstances and shall
forthwith cause receiver to be ap-
pointed TO wind up its affairs" con-
strued; and it Is held, that a judy
ment against bank directing the
payment Of money does not become
lien upon real property owned by the
bank.
From n judgment of the district
court of Sargent county, Wolfe j..
defendant appeals. Affirmed. Opinion
of the court by Christianson, Oh. j..
Lauder 4 Lauder. attorneys for mp
pellant. COnmy, Young 4 Burnett,
Of Fargo, N. D., for respondent.
From Richland County
Farmers National Bank of Lidger-
wood, North Dakota, a corporation,
plaintiff and appellant. vs.. Donald
Wright ct al. defendants; II. v. Me
Michael, respondent.
Syllabus: l. Amerccnent proceed.
ings are summary in character; the
evidence should be clear and con-
vincing: and the record should not
present substantial doubts, as to the
propriety Of amercing the officer,
arising because of the conduct Of the
plaintiff which may have caused the
failure to make a timely return. If
such failure was induced by the
plaintiff. or otherwise caused by
him. or il the whole case leaves the
court in doubt upon the subject, a
cause Of action in amerccment can
not be predicated on the delinquency,
and it is proper to refuse to make an
order amercing the officer.
Appeal from the district court Of
Richland county, Hon. Chas. T.. Wolfe,
Judge.
The order is affirmed. Opinion of
the court by johnson, J.. Lauder 4
Lauder, and Purcell 4 Heder, Wah-
petop. North Dakota, attorneys for
appellant. Forbes, Lounsbury 4
Forbes, WahpetOn, North Dakota, and
W. l.. Divet, Wahpcton, North Da-
kOta, attorneys for respondent.
Original
The State of North Dakota on the
relation Of f. F. Rurchard ct al,
REALTORS, VS.. Robert T.. Byrnc. as
secretary of state Of the state, Of
North Dakota. respondent.
Syllabus: Petitions of aspirants
for nomination at a primary election
under the provisions Of section 853.
{. l.. 1913, may be presented to the
secretary of state through the agency
Of postal or express facilities. Such
presentation is sufficient if deliv-
cry of such petitions is made by mail
or express in the usual manner to
50 some agent of the secretary of
state authorized to receive mail or
express within the time prescribed
by tho statute.
Held, for reasons stated in the
opinion, that in the instant case a
delivery Of petitions by an express
to the hoard Of admins
tration Of the state Of North Dakota
was delivery to the secretary Of
state through an agent authorized to
receive The same, apd therefore i
within the meaning o.
that term as used in the statute.
Original application for writ Of
Writ granted. Opinion of the court
by Nuessle. j.; Christianson, Oh. j.,
S. L. Nuchols and +.
o. HellstrOm of Bismarck. N. Oak.
attorneys for REALTORS. George +.
Shafer, attorney general, and John
Thorpe, assistant attorney general Of
Bismarck. N. Dak., attorneys for re-
sp0ndents.
From Nelson County
Peoples State bank of Aneta, a