Patterson v. Ward
| Decision Date | 21 October 1898 |
| Citation | 76 N.W. 1046,8 N.D. 87 |
| Court | North Dakota Supreme Court |
Appeal from District Court, Traill County; Pollock, J.
Action by Daniel Patterson against G. A. Ward and others for the appointment of a receiver and to foreclose a mortgage. After judgment, plaintiff moved for an order against H. D. Hurley receiver, to pay over certain money. J. E. Paulson and others interpleaded, and from an order granting the motion they appeal.
J. F Selby and Carmody & Leslie, for appellants.
F. B Lambert, for respondent.
This is an appeal from what is denominated in the record an "order offsetting judgments." No question of practice is raised. In 1894 one H. D. Hurley was appointed as receiver, by the District Court of Traill County, in an action entitled "Daniel Patterson vs. G. A. Ward, et ai." Under the terms of his appointment it was his duty to crop the lands involved in that litigation for that year and in carrying out such purposes he employed G. A. Ward, he being one of the defendants in that action, to harvest, shock, and care for the grain. In November of that year after the business of the farming year was concluded, the receiver rendered to the Court his account, which, after a full hearing, at which the parties interested were present in person and by counsel, was, by order of the Court, approved and allowed. In this order the receiver was expressly directed and ordered to pay to G. A. Ward, as a balance due him for his services, the sum of $ 598.50. Then, after fixing and allowing to Hurley his compensation as receiver, he was directed to retain the balance of the money in his hands, which the account rendered showed was a considerable sum, until the further order of the Court. Patterson, being dissatisfied with the allowances made to the receiver and to Ward, appealed therefrom to this Court. Upon a motion to dismiss the appeal as being taken from an order not appealable, this Court held that it fell "within a class of determinations which are final in respect to the subject matter involved, and hence may be reviewed in this Court as judgments of a special nature, made in an action for equitable relief," and was appealable, the account being full and final, covering all the transactions of the receiver for the full period for which he was appointed. Patterson v. Ward, 6 N.D. 359, 71 N.W. 543. On the hearing upon the merits the order of allowance to Ward was upheld by this Court in Patterson v. Ward, 6 N.D. 609, 72 N.W. 1013. In April, 1897, Patterson obtained a judgment and decree of foreclosure against G. A. Ward and three others in the action wherein Hurley was receiver. It appears that after the rendition of the account for the year 1894 Hurley was reappointed, and continued to crop the land as receiver, and, further, that he has not paid to Ward the sum allowed to him in the 1894 accou...
To continue reading
Request your trial