In re Schafer's Estate

South Dakota Supreme Court

In re Schafer's Estate

216 N.W. 948, 52 S.D. 182, 1927 S.D. LEXIS 315

CourtSouth Dakota Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 28, 1927

DocketFile No. 5581

StatusPublished

This text of 216 N.W. 948 (In re Schafer's Estate) 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

In re Schafer's Estate, 216 N.W. 948, 52 S.D. 182, 1927 S.D. LEXIS 315 (S.D. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

BIURCH, J.

This case is before us on rehearing. The first opinion is found in 209 N. W. 355. We are satisfied with the result reached and the law announced in our first opinion, but attorneys for both sides at the rehearing asked this court to indicate what issues are no'w open to the litigants for trial in the county court where the cause has been remanded for further proceedings. It is suggested that, with the views of this court on what is now issuable, counsel and the trial court will 'be able to confine themselves to such issues, and avoid confusion and another appeal to this court on conflicting views now entertained by opposing counsel. We are of the opinion that this court ought not to express any views at this time, but should consider only questions properly presented by the record. The former opinion is adhered to.

PORLEY, and SHERWOOD, JJ., concur. CAM3PBEER, P. J., disqualified, and not sitting. BROWN, J., not sitting.

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

BIURCH, J.

This case is before us on rehearing. The first opinion is found in 209 N. W. 355. We are satisfied with the result reached and the law announced in our first opinion, but attorneys for both sides at the rehearing asked this court to indicate what issues are no'w open to the litigants for trial in the county court where the cause has been remanded for further proceedings. It is suggested that, with the views of this court on what is now issuable, counsel and the trial court will 'be able to confine themselves to such issues, and avoid confusion and another appeal to this court on conflicting views now entertained by opposing counsel. We are of the opinion that this court ought not to express any views at this time, but should consider only questions properly presented by the record. The former opinion is adhered to.

PORLEY, and SHERWOOD, JJ., concur. CAM3PBEER, P. J., disqualified, and not sitting. BROWN, J., not sitting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

216 N.W. 948, 52 S.D. 182, 1927 S.D. LEXIS 315, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-schafers-estate-sd-1927.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack