Swanston v. Swanston Equipment Co.
| Decision Date | 17 January 1956 |
| Docket Number | No. 7472,7472 |
| Citation | 74 N.W.2d 452 |
| Parties | E. E. SWANSTON, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. SWANSTON EQUIPMENT COMPANY, a corporation, Defendant and Appellant. |
| Court | North Dakota Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
Where upon appeal from a judgment, entered in a case tried to the court without a jury, no facts are specified in the statement of the case for review, and no demand for a trial anew of the entire case is specified therein, the appellate court can only consider and determine errors specified upon the judgment roll and whether the findings, which are deemed in law to be true, sustain the judgment.
Lanier, Lanier & Knox, Fargo, for appellant.
J. K. Murray, Bismarck, for respondent.
By this action plaintiff sought to recover from the defendant wages and expenses for the month of January 1953, in the sum of $448.50. The defendant answered denying that it was indebted to the plaintiff in any amount and by way of counterclaim alleged that defendant was indebted to it in the sum of $12,500. At the trial the defendant admitted that plaintiff had been employed by it during the month of January 1953, and had not been paid his salary and expenses for that month. It was defendant's contention, however, that plaintiff's claim in this action had been released and settled by a compromise agreement made by the parties in a prior action. Upon the counterclaim defendant limited its claim to the value of a 1951 Nash automobile which it claimed had been converted by the plaintiff. The case was tried to the court without a jury, and judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiff for the full amount of his claim and for the dismissal of defendant's counterclaim. The defendant has appealed from the judgment. No demand for trial de novo, nor specifications of any facts which appellant desired this court to review were incorporated into the settled statement of the case as required by Section 28-2732, NDRC 1943. This section provides:
Ever since 1899, when the case of Ricks v. Bergsvendsen was decided this court has consistently held that upon an appeal in a case tried to the court without a jury, unless a demand for a trial anew, or questions of fact which appellant desires the supreme court to review, are specified in the statement of the case, the review by the supreme court is limited to a consideration and determination of whether the findings in the case sustain the judgment. This holding is predicated chiefly upon the statutory declaration that 'all questions of fact not so specified shall be deemed upon appeal to have been...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hovland v. Hovland
...appeal is limited to a consideration and determination of whether the findings in the case sustain the judgment. Swanston v. Swanston Equipment Co., N.D., 74 N.W.2d 452; Ricks v. Bergsvendsen, 8 N.D. 578, 80 N.W. 768; Erickson v. Citizens' Nat. Bank, 9 N.D. 81, 81 N.W. 46; Hayes v. Taylor, ......
-
Barr v. Barnes County Bd. of County Com'rs
...v. Hovland, 104 N.W.2d 6 (N.D.1960); Park Board of City of Williston v. Schumacher, 77 N.W.2d 826 (N.D.1956); Swanston v. Swanston Equipment Company, 74 N.W.2d 452 (N.D.1956). The majority have erred in reviewing the evidence under these rules of this Court even for the limited purpose of d......
-
Spicer v. Hamilton
...the judgment roll and to a consideration of whether the findings, which are deemed to be true, support the judgment. Swanston Equipment Co. v. Swanston (N.D.) 74 N.W.2d 452; Mevorah v. Goodman (N.D.) 65 N.W.2d 278; Anderson v. Blixt, 72 N.W.2d 799; Park Bd. of City of Williston v. Schumache......