Otis v. Weide
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Ramsey county by plaintiff, as receiver of Savings Bank of St. Paul, to determine the adverse claims of' defendants to certain vacant and unoccupied land: Defendant Urban Investment Company alone answered, claiming to be the owner in fee of the premises. The case was tried before Orr, J., who found in favor of plaintiff. From a judgment entered pursuant to the findings, defendant Urban Investment Company appealed.
1Opinion of the Court
START, O. J.
Action to determine adverse claims to certain lots in the city of St. Paul. Judgment for the plaintiff, from which the defendant Urban Investment Company appealed. The question here to be decided is this: Do the facts found by the trial court sustain its conclusion of law.to the effect that the tax judgment and sale by virtue of which the-plaintiff claims title to the lots are valid, and hence he is the owner: thereof ?
The facts so found are to the effect following: On and prior ter November 1, 1886, Nellie M. Weide was the owner of the lots, and on November 13, 1893, she and her…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hokanson v. GundersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- State ex rel. Weide v. District Court Second Judicial Dist.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
3Cited by1 opinion
- Otis v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907