First National Bank v. Siman
Cases that cite this one
10 later published cases cite this decision.
- In the Matter of Samuels & Co., Inc., Bankrupt. Curtis R. Stowers v. James S. Mahon, Trustee, and C. I. T. Corporation (5th Cir. 1973)
- United States v. Henry W. Matthews and Nettie Matthews, Doing Business Under the Firm Name and Style of Yuba Livestock Auction Company (9th Cir. 1957)
- Kelly v. Lang (N.D. 1954)
- First National Bank v. Southwestern Livestock, Inc. (District Court, D. Kansas 1985)
- Farmers State Bank v. Stewart (Mo. 1970)
- Seymour v. Austin (District Court, D. Oregon 1951)
- Birmingham v. Rice Bros. (Iowa 1947)
- United States v. Squires (District Court, S.D. Iowa 1974)
- Allen C. Driver, Inc. v. Mills (Md. 1952)
- Citizens State Bank v. Farmers Union Livestock Cooperative Co. (Kan. 1948)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
This case is before this court a second time. See First National Bank of Pipestone v. Siman et al., 65 S. D. 514, 275 N. W. 347. Following the filing of the remittitur on the prior appeal, the appellants, who were defendants below, amended their answer and alleged that, by virtue of the Packers and Stockyards Act, 42 Stat. 159, 7 U.S.C.A. §§ 181 to 229, the Steele-Siman & Company became a federal public utility and, as such, its constitutional rights *119 were violated by the decision on the prior appeal. The federal questions raised and the arguments presented are similar, if not identical, to those presented to the Minnesota court in the case of Mason City Production Credit Association v. Sig Ellingson & Co., 205 Minn. 537, 286 N. W. 713, in which case the Supreme Court of the. United States denied a petition for writ of certiorari, 308 U. S. 599, 60 S. Ct. 130, 84 L. Ed. 501, and a petition for a rehearing, 308 U. S. 637, 60 S. Ct. 178, 84 L. Ed. 529.
We are content to rest our decision of the federal questions involved upon the reasoning of the Minnesota court in the Ellingson case. The trial court in this case having found against the appellant, it follows that the judgment and order appealed from should be, and are, affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.