McCarthy v. Talley

139 N.W. 1012, 24 N.D. 395, 1913 N.D. LEXIS 10
North Dakota Supreme Court·Decided January 29, 1913·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Pee Cueiam.

The same issues are involved in this action as were disposed of in the companion case of McCarty v. Kepreta, — L.R.A.(N.S.) —, 139 N. W. 992, in which an opinion has recently been filed granting a new trial to John Kepreta, appellant. That decision controls the disposition of this case. Accordingly, it is ordered that the judgment herein entered, and the order therefore, be set aside and vacated and a new trial in this action is granted. The costs of this appeal are to be assessed in favor of appellant and against respondent, but excluding those on the reargument had on the rehearing granted.

Spaldirg, Ch. J., and Beuce, J., dissent. For reasons stated in dissenting opinion in the case of McCarty v. Kepreta, filed this day, we dissent from the foregoing opinion of the court.

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

McCarthy v. Talley, 139 N.W. 1012, 24 N.D. 395, 1913 N.D. LEXIS 10 (N.D. 1913).

139 N.W. 1012 (McCarthy v. Talley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Knox-Harrison Bank & Trust Co. v. Johnson
164 N.E. 298 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1928)
Denver Suburban Homes & Water Co. v. Fugate
63 Colo. 423 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1917)