Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Cocks

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 13, 1887PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Appeal by plaintiffs from a judgment of the district court for Hen-nepin county, where the action was tried before Rea, J., without a jury. Upon defendant’s motion, before answering, the court struck out of the complaint the allegations as to inadequacy of price and of the failure to file an affidavit of costs and disbursements.

1Opinion of the CourtGileillan, C. J.

Action to set aside a foreclosure of a mortgage, under the power of sale contained in it. Two matters are charged as *531irregularities in the sale: First, that the place of sale mentioned in the notice of sale was indefinite; second, that, while the mortgage was of the entire interest in the two lots owned by plaintiff, the notice of sale described the mortgage as upon an undivided half of those lots. The description in the notice of sale was: “The undivided half of lots two (2) and three (3,) in block two, (2.) Lot eight, (8,) in block four, (4.) Lot six, (6,) in block five, (5,) and lot five,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Cameron v. AdamsMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
  2. Maxwell v. NewtonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1886

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Ten Hills Co. v. Ten Hills Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1939
  2. Kantack v. KreuerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1968
  3. Guidarelli v. LazarettiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
  4. Johnson v. Northwestern Loan & Building Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
  5. Stearns v. CarlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API