McCormick Harvesting Machine Co. v. Doucette
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Morrison county, Baxter, J., denying a motion for a new trial. The case was tried without a jury and the court ordered judgment in favor of plaintiff for $246.10.
1Opinion of the CourtStart, C. J.
The complaint is upon a promissory note, alleging that the defendant made the note. The answer, so far as here material, is as follows: “Answering the complaint * * * defendant shows to the court and alleges: First, that he denies each ■and every allegation, and each and every part of each and every ■allegation in the said complaint contained; second, that he expressly denies that he either signed, or caused to .be signed, the note ■described in said complaint.” It did not contain any allegations stated upon information and belief, and was verified by the defendant that it was true of his own…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Johnston Harvester Co. v. ClareSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
- Bausman v. Credit Guarantee Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
- P. P. Mast & Co. v. MatthewsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
- Cowing v. PetersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
- Moen v. EldredSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1876
3Cited by9 opinions
- Porter v. Winona & Dakota Grain Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
- National City Bank v. Zimmer Vacuum Renovator Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
- La Plant v. Pratt-Ford Greenhouse Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
- Moore v. HolmesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
- Fagerstrom v. RappaportSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.