Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

CHRISTIANSEN, Respondent v. PRUDENTIAL LIFE INS. CO., Appellant

Appeal and Error — Costs.

Where under Moratorium Act period of redemption was extended to February 1, 1939, and the order of extension had expired by its own terms, question presented on appeal from order was moot so that appeal was dismissed without cost to either party. (Laws. 1937, c. 207, § 10.)

PER CURIAM.

This appeal involves the question as to whether the trial court erred in entering an order extending the period of redemption under what is commonly referred to as the Moratorium Act, Chapter 207, Laws 1937. The period of redemption was extended to February 1, 1939, and from such order defendant has appealed.

The order having expired by its own terms, the Court is of the opinion that the question presented on this appeal has become moot, and that the appeal therefore should be dismissed without cost to either party, as provided in section 10 of the act referred to.

Order will be entered accordingly.

All the Judges concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

CHRISTIANSEN v. PRUDENTIAL LIFE
(Mar 14, 1939)