First National Bank v. Siman

South Dakota Supreme Court

First National Bank v. Siman

289 N.W. 416, 67 S.D. 118, 1939 S.D. LEXIS 86

CourtSouth Dakota Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 30, 1939

DocketFile No. 8247.

StatusPublished

Cited by14 cases

This text of 289 N.W. 416 (First National Bank v. Siman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering South Dakota Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

First National Bank v. Siman, 289 N.W. 416, 67 S.D. 118, 1939 S.D. LEXIS 86 (S.D. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This case is before this court a second time. See First National Bank of Pipestone v. Siman et al., 65 S. D. 514, 275 N. W. 347. Following the filing of the remittitur on the prior appeal, the appellants, who were defendants below, amended their answer and alleged that, by virtue of the Packers and Stockyards Act, 42 Stat. 159, 7 U.S.C.A. §§ 181 to 229, the Steele-Siman & Company became a federal public utility and, as such, its constitutional rights *119 were violated by the decision on the prior appeal. The federal questions raised and the arguments presented are similar, if not identical, to those presented to the Minnesota court in the case of Mason City Production Credit Association v. Sig Ellingson & Co., 205 Minn. 537, 286 N. W. 713, in which case the Supreme Court of the. United States denied a petition for writ of certiorari, 308 U. S. 599, 60 S. Ct. 130, 84 L. Ed. 501, and a petition for a rehearing, 308 U. S. 637, 60 S. Ct. 178, 84 L. Ed. 529.

We are content to rest our decision of the federal questions involved upon the reasoning of the Minnesota court in the Ellingson case. The trial court in this case having found against the appellant, it follows that the judgment and order appealed from should be, and are, affirmed.

All the Judges concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

This case is before this court a second time. See First National Bank of Pipestone v. Siman et al., 65 S. D. 514, 275 N. W. 347. Following the filing of the remittitur on the prior appeal, the appellants, who were defendants below, amended their answer and alleged that, by virtue of the Packers and Stockyards Act, 42 Stat. 159, 7 U.S.C.A. §§ 181 to 229, the Steele-Siman & Company became a federal public utility and, as such, its constitutional rights *119 were violated by the decision on the prior appeal. The federal questions raised and the arguments presented are similar, if not identical, to those presented to the Minnesota court in the case of Mason City Production Credit Association v. Sig Ellingson & Co., 205 Minn. 537, 286 N. W. 713, in which case the Supreme Court of the. United States denied a petition for writ of certiorari, 308 U. S. 599, 60 S. Ct. 130, 84 L. Ed. 501, and a petition for a rehearing, 308 U. S. 637, 60 S. Ct. 178, 84 L. Ed. 529.

We are content to rest our decision of the federal questions involved upon the reasoning of the Minnesota court in the Ellingson case. The trial court in this case having found against the appellant, it follows that the judgment and order appealed from should be, and are, affirmed.

All the Judges concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

289 N.W. 416, 67 S.D. 118, 1939 S.D. LEXIS 86, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/first-national-bank-v-siman-sd-1939.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack