The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1927-05-20

Iof physician, and In such case, II
the communications ara received, OF
heard, from q patient, and are nsces-
sary to enable the physician to pre-.
scribe or act for the patient, then
the privilege extended to the physi.
clan applies equally to the nurse. and
such communications are privileged.
z. A general objection to the ties.
timony Of nurse 10 not sufficient
the objection should be made to each
question calling for privileged in.
formation so that the court can de-
!tcrmincs whether or not the informa-
ton was acquired by the nurse while
assisting the physician.
.. In an action tried TO- court,
unless 1t appears otherwise, It is
presumed that the court considered
only the competent testimony in
making It's findings and conclusions.
.. No unfavorablc infereAcc can
be drawn against party to an &C.
tion for objccting to the testimony
Of a doctor. on the ground that such
testimony is privileged, nor for the
failure to call the doctor as a wit
ness.
10. For reasons stated in the
opinion it is held. that the plaintiff
has famed to establish BY pre-
ipondcrance Of the evidence that the
grantor in the deed was not mentally
competent to execute the deed, at the
ttimc it was executed
Appeal from the district court of
Cass county, Hon. NJ. ]. Englcrt,
judge.
Reversed.
Opinion of the court by Burke,
judge.
Christensen, judge, dissenting.
Lowell 4 Horner, Fargo. N. o.. Nc.
lntyrc, Burtness & Robbins, Grand
Forks. N. d., and Wood and Breaw,
Fargo, N. D.. attorneys for appellant.
! Shurc 4 Murphy, Fargo, N. D., ut
torneys for respondents
FROM STUTSMAN COUNTY
Herbert N. Croonquist, Plaintiff and
! Respondent
l.William Walker, Defendant
Margaret Walker, Defendant and Ap-
SYLLABUS:
| CD Under the provisions Of Sec
ton 7845 of the Code requiring pro-
ceedings to be had within one year
from the date Of an order in the
Supreme Court. and returning the
case to the District Court for further
proceedings, the term "prOceedings'
means any step taken, and required
to be taken, to bring the case on for
trial.
t2) The service of a notice Of
trial. the placing Of the case on the
calendar for trial, and the subsc-
quent stipulation Of the parties to
continue the case over subsequent
terms are proceedings" within pur-
view Of Section 7845 c. L. 1913.
CD Where such 'prOcecdings'
have been taken against the defend
ant, the defendant cannot invoke the
provisions of Section 7945 requiring
dismissal.
t4) Where the complaint shows q
cause of action against two or more
defendants where each defendant is
jointly and severally liable, the dis
missal of the case against one de-
PENDANT under the provisions Of Sec
ton 7845 does not necessarily re-
quire dismissal as against the other
defendant.
Appeal from the District Court of
Stutsman county, Hon J. A. Coffey,
'u AFFIRMED.
Opinion Of the Court by Burr, J.
5. r. Ellsworth, of Jamestown, N.
D.. Attorney for defendant and ap-
pellant.
James Morris, of Darlington, n
D.. Attorney for plaintiff and re-
spondcnt.
FROM MCINTOSH COUNTY
State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and
Respondent
Aaron. Sukut, Defendant and Appel
liant.
ISYLLABUS:
|. Where proceedings were
brought before Justice Of the Peace
under the Uniform Illegitimacy Act,
Chapter 165 of the Session Laws of
1928, upon complaint of the mother
Of the child whose paternity was in
volvcd, ard warrant of arrest is
sued, it was proper to entitle the
proceedings in the name of the
State; and the District Court proper
plant thus entitled.
| 2. Where under the state Of facts
as hereinbefore stated, the defend
ant waived preliminary cxamina-
ton before the Justice of the Peace
and was held to answer to the Dis
trHt Court, and the said Justice did
not thereafter have any testimony
taken and reduced to writing, there
was no error in the refusal of the
District Court to quash the proceed
ings because no examination was
reduced to writing.
Appeal from the District Court Of
Mcintosh county, Hon. Geo. M. Mocll-
ring, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Opinion Of the court by Burr. j.
Arthur b. Atkins Of Napoleon, N.
D., attorney for defendant and APP
| pcllant.
Franz Shubeck, Of Ashley, N. D..
attorney for plaintiff and respond
FROM CASS COUNTY
Peoples State Bank Of New Effing-
ton, South Dakota, and S. N.
Hendrickson, Plaintiffs and Re-
spondents,
First State Bank Of Walcott, North
Dakota, Defendant and Appellant.
SYLLABUS:
Ill al NctiOn WE money hA0 and
received. or to recover fund alleged
to have been paid by u plaintiff to
the defendant, where the defendant
filed counterclaim asking specific
application Of the. fund upon indcbt-
cdncss owing by one plaintiff to the
defendant, It is held. for reasons
stated in the opinion, that no error
was committed in the trial of the
case as court case.
Appeal from the District Court Of
Cass county. Hon. A. T. Cole, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Opinion of the court by Birdzell,
Oh. ]. sa
Purcell 4 Hedcr, and c. J. Kachel-
hotter, Wahpeton, N. OAK, Attorneys