
    MARTIN TEIGEN, Respondent, v. MINNEKOTA ELEVATOR COMPANY, a Corporation, Appellant.
    (200 N. W. 41.)
    (Cross Appeals.)
    Former case held controlling'.
    Following Teigen v. Occident Elevator Co. ante, 563, which held the identical chattel mortgage involved in this case to be invalid, judgment should be entered notwithstanding the verdict.
    Opinion filed July 21, 1924.
    In District Court, Ward County, Moellring, J.
    ’ Action for the conversion of grain. Plaintiff has appealed from an order granting a new trial and defendant from an order denying judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
    Reversed.
    
      Palda & Aaker, for appellant.
    
      F. B. Lambert, for respondent;
   Per. Curiam.

The same chattel mortgage is involved in this case that was considered and determined in Teigen v. Occident Elevator Co. ante, 563, 200 N W. 38. Plaintiff’s right of recovery in this case is-wholly dependent upon the validity of such chattel mortgage; hence, following Teigen v. Occident Elevator Company and the determination made in that case concerning the validity of the chattel mortgage involved herein, the trial court should have ordered judgment notwithstanding the verdict in defendant’s favor. It is accordingly ordered that the cause be remanded for appropriate proceedings consonant with this opinion.

Bronson, Ch. J., and Nubssle and Johnson, JJ., concur.

Bir.bzell and Christianson, JJ., dissent.  