Whether the district court acts upon a given matter cannot be determined by the form of the order or the style of the judge’s signature thereto.
3. This case follows and is governed by Insurance Co. v. Weber, post, 50 N. W. Rep. 703, the opinion in which is handed down with this.
(Opinion Filed Nov. 18, 1891.)
APPEAL from district court, Richland county; Hon. W. S. Lauder, Judge.
W. E. Purcell and L. B. Everdell, for appellant. McCumber & Bogart, for respondent.
Application of the Travelers’ Insurance Company for a writ of mandamus to C. L. Mayer, a justice of the peace for Richland county, to compel him to issue execution on a certain judgment. Writ allowed. Defendant appeals. Appeal dismissed.
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Wallin, J. On January 3, 1891, an alternative writ of mandamus, signed by “W. S. Lauder, Judge,” was issued, commanding the defendant, C. L. Mayer, justice of the peace, to issue execution out of his court upon a judgment therein in favor of this plaintiff and against one Gertrude Weber, or “show cause before the judge of this court, in chambers, at his office in the city of Wahpeton,” etc. Defendant showed cause by answer setting up certain defenses. A general demurrer to the answer was interposed, and plaintiff also moved to strike out the answer. After a hearing the following order was made: “This action coming on to be heard on the foregoing demurrer on the 10th day of January, 1891, and after hearing the argument of the attorneys for the respective parties herein, it is ordered that the said demurrer be, and the same is hereby sustained, and the answer in said action dismissed. Dated January 10th, 1891. W. S. Lauder, Judge.” On the same day an exception was taken and allowed to said order. So far as appears of record, no separate order or judgment was made directing the peremptory writ to issue; but on the said hearing
