U.L. Burdick v. Beatrice Mann U.L. Burdick v. Beatrice Mann

U.L. Burdick v. Beatrice Mann

1930.ND.63, 231 N.W. 545, 59 N.D. 611

    • 4,00 kr
    • 4,00 kr

Publisher Description

Plaintiff brought this action to recover for certain services, which he alleges in his complaint that he rendered for the defendant as an attorney at law. The action was originally brought in the district court of Cass county, but on August 26, 1929, it was transferred to the district court of Burleigh county. The case was noticed for trial and appeared upon the December, 1929, term of said court as one of the causes for trial at such term. On December 21, 1929, plaintiff moved that the case be advanced on the calendar. On December 29, 1929, the presiding Judge, Honorable R. G. McFarland, entered an order directing that the said December term be reconvened on January 3, 1930, at 10 oclock A.M. on that day; and further directed that the above entitled action be placed upon the peremptory civil calendar for trial as the second jury case upon such calendar. Thereafter the said Honorable R. G. McFarland duly requested Honorable G. Grimson, one of the Judges of the second judicial district, to sit in place of Judge McFarland as Judge upon the trial of the said cause. Upon the case being called for trial by Judge Grimson on January 3, 1930, the defendant appeared specially by her attorney F. O. Hellstrom, and so appearing made objection to the jurisdiction of the court. The objection assailed the legality and validity of the order entered by Judge 3, 1930, and setting the above-entitled action for trial upon the peremptory civil calendar as the second jury case. Judge Grimson entered an order overruling the special appearance and objections to jurisdiction. Thereupon the defendant filed an affidavit of prejudice against Judge Grimson and such proceedings were had comformably to law that the Honorable John C. Lowe, one of the Judges of the fifth judicial district, was called in to sit in the place of Judge Grimson as trial Judge. When the case was called for trial by Judge Lowe on January 4, 1930, the defendant appeared by her said attorney and moved that the order that had been entered by Judge McFarland on December 29, 1929, be vacated and set aside. The motion was denied. The defendant then moved that the action be "abated" as quoted and dismissed. The motion was denied. The defendant thereupon moved the said court that the cause be continued over the term. This motion was also denied. The defendant has appealed to this court from the said last mentioned four orders, to-wit: from the order entered by Judge Grimson on January 3, 1930, overruling the defendants special appearance and objection to jurisdiction; from the order entered by Judge Lowe on January 4, 1930, denying defendants motion to vacate and set aside the order entered by Judge McFarland on December 29, 1929; from the order entered by Judge Lowe on January 4, 1930, overruling defendants motion for a dismissal and abatement of the above action, and, from the order entered by Judge Lowe on January 4, 1930, denying defendants motion for a continuance.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
1930
1 July
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
11
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SIZE
67.9
KB

More Books by Court of Appeals of New York

People State New York v. Anthony King People State New York v. Anthony King
1984
Fidelity And Deposit Company Maryland v. Arthur Andersen & Co. Fidelity And Deposit Company Maryland v. Arthur Andersen & Co.
1983
Credit Alliance Corporation Et Al. v. Arthur Andersen & Co. Credit Alliance Corporation Et Al. v. Arthur Andersen & Co.
1985
Primm v. King Primm v. King
1958
Incorporated Village Nyack v. Daytop Village Incorporated Village Nyack v. Daytop Village
1991
Roberta Rinaldo Et Al. v. Arthur Mcgovern Roberta Rinaldo Et Al. v. Arthur Mcgovern
1991