Larson v. Nygaard
| Decision Date | 21 January 1921 |
| Docket Number | No. 21922.,21922. |
| Citation | 180 N.W. 1002,148 Minn. 104 |
| Parties | LARSON v. NYGAARD et al. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from District Court, Norman County; Andrew Grindeland, Judge.
Action by B. B. Larson against J. P. Nygaard and others. Judgment for defendants, and from the denial of a new trial, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
A party cannot avoid the award of arbitrators on the ground that they received evidence in the absence of the parties where they were expressly authorized to do so.
Arbitration is favored in law and the courts will not interfere with the conclusions drawn by the arbitrators from conflicting evidence, nor set aside an award made in good faith and in the exercise of an honest judgment, even if the court would have reached a different result.
To impeach an award on the ground that the arbitrators reached a wrong conclusion, it must be shown that this conclusion was so at variance with any conclusion which could legitimately be drawn from the evidence before them as to imply bad faith or a failure to exercise an honest judgment. Ole J. Vaule and Wm. P. Murphy, both of Crookston, for appellant.
Brattland & McLaughlin, of Ada, for respondents.
In 1914 plaintiff, defendant Nygaard, Peter Norum, and James Larson became partners in business under the firm name of the Halstad Automobile Company. They had and conducted a farm implement business, an automobile garage and repair shop, and an electric light plant in the village of Halstad. Plaintiff furnished all the capital and had a one-half interest in the business, Nygaard had a three-twelfths interest therein, Norum a two-twelfths interest, and James Larson a one-twelfth interest.
By the partnership agreement Nygaard and Norum were to conduct the business and receive a monthly salary of $60 each as a part of the expense, plaintiff was to receive interest on the capital furnished at the rate of 7 per centum per annum, and the profits, after paying these salaries and the interest, was to be divided between the partners in proportion to their respective interests in the business. In 1916 Norum withdrew from the firm and transferred his interest to plaintiff, and plaintiff and Nygaard seem to have conducted the business thereafter. The implement business and the garage and automobile business were sold, and the proceeds were received by plaintiff. Thereafter Nygaard operated the electric light plant. Disagreements arose between him and plaintiff, and they concluded to terminate their business relations in February or March, 1919, by Nygaard relinquishing all his interest in the firm to plaintiff on being paid the value of such interest. They agreed to have the value of this interest determined by arbitrators, and to secure payment of the amount so determined plaintiff deposited $1,000 with defendant Benson, cashier of the bank at Halstad. Thereupon Nygaard surrendered possession of the lighting plant to plaintiff and withdrew from the business. They mutually agreed upon Carl Snustad, Oscar Viker, and Albert J. Grothe, three farmers living in the vicinity of Halstad, as arbitrators. They agreed that each should present his own case personally without any attorney or other representative at the hearings, and that the decision of the arbitrators should be binding, conclusive, and final. These agreements were all oral. When the arbitrators assembled, the parties stated to them orally the matters to be determined, and then made their respective claims, and presented their testimony and such accounts and papers as they had. No record was made of the proceedings before the arbitrators or of the evidence submitted to them.
The arbitrators made their award in writing awarding Nygaard $700 for his interest in the business, $150 for unpaid salary, and $250 for breach of a contract of employment for the year 1919.
Thereafter plaintiff brought this action to set aside the award and have the amount deposited with defendant Benson returned to him. Defendant interposed an answer asking for judgment on the award. The court sustained the award and directed judgment for defendant Nygaard for the amount thereof. Plaintiff appealed from an order denying a new trial.
Plaintiff contends that the award of the arbitrators was void because they received evidence in the absence of the parties and without their knowledge....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Park Const. Co. v. Independent School Dist. No. 32
...by the legislature, Mason's Minn. St.1927, § 9513, et seq., and applied by this court, Daniels v. Willis, supra, and Larson v. Nygaard, 148 Minn. 104, 108, 180 N.W. 1002, favors Public policy, where the legislature has spoken, is what it has declared that policy to be. So far as the questio......
-
Rueda v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.
...by the legislature, Mason's Minn. St. 1927, § 9513, et seq., and applied by this court, Daniels v. Willis, supra, and Larson v. Nygaard, 148 Minn. 104, 108, 180 N.W. 1002, favors "Public policy, where the legislature has spoken, is what it has declared that policy to be. So far as the quest......
-
Anderson v. Federated Mut. Ins. Co.
...589 (1954); Park Constr. v. Independent School Dist. No. 32, 209 Minn. 182, 186-87, 296 N.W. 475, 477 (1941); Larson v. Nygaard, 148 Minn. 104, 108, 180 N.W. 1002, 1003 (1921). Therefore, validation of arbitration agreements could not have been a reason for adoption of the act in Minnesota.......
-
Park Const. Co. v. Independent School Dist. No. 32, Etc.
...and evidence before the arbitrators as to imply bad faith or a failure to exercise an honest judgment on their part. Larson v. Nygaard, 148 Minn. 104, 180 N.W. 1002. Perhaps, as Mr. Justice Stone pointed out in Kaufman Jewelry Co. v. Agricultural Insurance Co., 172 Minn. 314, 318, 215 N.W. ......