Martin v. Parker
Supreme Court of Minnesota
In an action for tlie partition of real property under Chap. 74, Gen. Stat, the names of the defendants being first stated in the title of the case (in the summons), and it appearing’ from the' complaint that the defendants named are the only persons (except the plaintiffs) having or claiming any interest in the property, the summons addressed “ to the above named defendants ” is a compliance with the statute.
Read the full summary
In an action for tlie partition of real property under Chap. 74, Gen. Stat, the names of the defendants being first stated in the title of the case (in the summons), and it appearing’ from the' complaint that the defendants named are the only persons (except the plaintiffs) having or claiming any interest in the property, the summons addressed “ to the above named defendants ” is a compliance with the statute. The defendants in this case appealed from an order of the District Court for Hennepin County denying a motion to set aside the summons. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
*14 By the Court
Wilson, Cii. J.
This is an action for the partition of real property under Chapter 74, of the General Statutes. The summons is addressed “ To the above named defendants;” the names of the defendants being before stated in the title of the case. The complaint alleges “That the said plaintiff, John ¡Martin, and the said defendant, Benjamin. Parker, own, possess, and are seized in fee simple as tenants in common, of the 'following described land, real estate and'premises. ” “ * * “That the said plaintiff, Jane B. ¡Martin, is the wife of said plaintiff, John Martin, and as such; has,…
2Cited by3 opinions
- State v. ShtemmeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
- First National Bank v. St. Anthony & Dakota Elevator Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
- Rosenbaum v. HowardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1897