The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1927-03-24
FROM CRIGGS COUNTY

Chas. r.. wolfe, Dist. d., sitting -
his stead.
FROM GRIGGS COUNTY
State Bank of Coopcrstown, North
Dakota, II corporation, Plaintiff and
Respondent
Andrew Jackson Newell and Dorgild
Newell. his wife, Defendants and
Appellants.
SYLLABUS:
l. A deed Of real property from q
husband to his wife was properl.
executed, and handed to the wife BY
the husband, who stated ut the time
that he was deciding the land to her
and that her father was canccling tn,
debt which the husband owed hel
father, such statement being cor
robOratcd by the father; the wife &C.
cepted the deed and gave it to hel
father who put in in his safe, it is
held, that there was a good con
sideration for the decd and Il deliv.
cry free from any condition.
2. Estoppel must be pleaded, but
when the allegations Of the plead
ing amount to an estoppcl, it is suf
ficient, although the estOppel is MOI
pleaded in so many words or thu
pleading specifically designated a
such.
3. Where husband decided hi.
land to his wife, who had the deee
put away in safe where it remained
for seven years without recording
both husband and wife remaining
silent about the deed and in thu
meantime the husband being in con
troll Of the land as the apparent
owner, and where he with the wifc's
knowledge, borrowed large sums o.
money from bank on the strength
of his apparent ownership, they ART
cstopped from asserting that thu
title Of the wife to said real estate
is superior to plaintiffs judgment
lien.
Appeal from the District Court Of
Griggs County, North Dakota, Hon
NJ. J. Englert, Judge.
MODIFIED AND AFFIRMED.
Conmy, Young & Burnett, Fargo
N. D., John Sad, Cooperstown, N. d.
NJ. w. Duffy, Cooperstown, N. D., At
torneys for Plaintiff and Respond
ent.
Nestos, Hcrigstad & Stcnersen
Minot, North Dakota, Attorneys fol
Defendants and Appellants.
FROM CASS COUNTY
McConnon & Company, corporation
Plaintiff and Appellant
vs.
Leonard J.. Sletten, ct al, Defendant
D. B. Mcdonald, Defendant and Res
pendent.
SYLLABUS:
l.. Where an action is brough
against two or more defendants, re
siding in different counties, tn,
plaintiff may bring the action in ;
county in which. any one of thes,
defendants resides; and the fact tina
the defendant residing in the count!
where the action is brought does no
answer is no ground for change O.
the place of the trialsto the count!
of an answering defendant.
2. An application for change o
venue on the ground of convenience
Of witnesses cannot be made unit
after the issues have been joined b,
!. the filing Of an answer.
3. Where a change Of the plac,
of trial is requested on the groun,
of convenience of witnesses the ap
plicank must show to the court wha
he expects to prove by these witness
es, and the court will examine til,
affidavits and the pleadings to deter
mine the materiality Of the allege,
testimony. II such desired testi
mony is not admissible under tn,
issues a. framed by the pleadings n,
change should be granted for tn,
convenience, of witnesses.
4. In an application for change o
venue on the ground e convenienc,
Of witnesses, the convenience Of !,
defendant is not considered. The.
must be witnesses other than tn
parties to the action.
Appeal from the District Court o
Cass County, Hon. NJ. J. Englert
Judge.
I Opinion Of the Court by Burr, J..
BuYfening, Conmy, Soule & Pierce
Fargo, North Dakota, Attorneys TO
Plaintiff and Appellant.
Sad & Duffy, .Coopcrstown, Nortl
Dakota, Attorneys for Defendant AM
Respondent.
FROM DIVIDE COUNTY
Dakota Trust Company, q corpora
ton, Plaintiff and Respondent
VS..
County Of Divide, public corpora
ton, Defendant
Art Grunke, ct al, co-partners doinl
business under the firm name an
style Of c. E. Halter Z Company
= -