Wallace v. Waverly Independent Consolidated School District No. 1

South Dakota Supreme Court

Wallace v. Waverly Independent Consolidated School District No. 1

258 N.W. 128, 63 S.D. 285

CourtSouth Dakota Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 17, 1934

DocketFile No. 7714

StatusPublished

This text of 258 N.W. 128 (Wallace v. Waverly Independent Consolidated School District No. 1) 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

Wallace v. Waverly Independent Consolidated School District No. 1, 258 N.W. 128, 63 S.D. 285 (S.D. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff and respondent 'brought this action to recover upon certain bonds issued by the defendant school district. The school district, by way of defense, alleged payment of the bonds. The defense of payment is predicated upon the issuance by the school district of a certain warrant which, it is contended, was accepted by the agents of this plaintiff in payment of the bonds. The trial court found that there was no one authorized as an agent, or otherwise, by this plaintiff to deal with or accept the warrant on his behalf, andi that the bonds had not been paid.

These findings, we believe, are amply supported by the evidence, and 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.

Plaintiff and respondent 'brought this action to recover upon certain bonds issued by the defendant school district. The school district, by way of defense, alleged payment of the bonds. The defense of payment is predicated upon the issuance by the school district of a certain warrant which, it is contended, was accepted by the agents of this plaintiff in payment of the bonds. The trial court found that there was no one authorized as an agent, or otherwise, by this plaintiff to deal with or accept the warrant on his behalf, andi that the bonds had not been paid.

These findings, we believe, are amply supported by the evidence, and 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)

258 N.W. 128, 63 S.D. 285, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wallace-v-waverly-independent-consolidated-school-district-no-1-sd-1934.