Page:North Dakota Reports (vol. 2).pdf/325

 But, in the absence of such duplicate certificate in the proper office, junior incumbrances, or attaching creditors of the mortgagor, would have no means of knowing whether default had been made by the mortgagor, or when the right to redeem would expire, or the amount necessary therefor. For their protection the filing of the duplicate certificate is highly necessary, and its absence may furnish a ground of action against the negligent party, but does not affect the validity of the sale. The statute is directory, not mandatory. This accords with the well-established rule that where the statute specifies a time within which an act, particularly an official act, shall be done, such statute is to be regarde as directory merely, unless the nature of the act or the phraseology of the statute is such that designation of time must be considered as a limitation of the power of the officer. Suth. St. Const. § 446 ef seqg.; and see San Francisco v. Pixley, 21 Cal. 59; Cunningham v. Cassidy, 17 N. Y. 276; Osman v. Traphagen, 23 Mich. 85; Bunker v. Rand, 19 Wis. 258.

We think there is nothing in the error in the name. It is now quite generally held that the omission of the middle initial, or a mistake in such initial, is entirely immaterial in legal proceedings, whether civil or criminal. The law recognizes but one Christian name. See 16 Amer. & Eng. Enc. Law, p. 114, and cases cited.

In this case, as in others that have been submitted to us, the conclusions of law reached by the trial court and the formal judgment are thrown together in one instrument. This, we think, is bad practice. The statute requires the judgment to be entered in the judgment book. This practice compels clerks of district courts to enter the conclusions of law as a part of the judgment. This is a useless incumbrance of the record, and one never contemplated by the statute. Trial courts should see to it that attorneys in preparing their conclusions of law and final judgments keep the two. entirely distinct. The district court is directed to reverse its judgment as to this appellant, and order a new trial. Reversed. All concur.