Legal Opinion

Ernster v. Christianson

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided November 17, 1909PublishedCited by 13 opinions

Appeal from Circuit Court, Marshall County. ' Hon. J. H. McCoy, Judge. Action by Michael Ernster against Neis Peter Christianson. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtCorson, J.

This case comes before us' on appeal by the defendant from a judgment entered upon a directed verdict in favor of the plaintiff, and from the order denying a new trial. The action was instituted by the plaintiff to recover the sum of $990, with interest from July 21, 1899, and the complaint, as amended on the trial states plaintiff’s cause of action substantially as follows : “That one the 21st day of July, A. D. 1899, the defendant made, executed, and delivered to the plaintiff a certain deed in writing, whereby he conveyed to the plaintiff the following de*105scribed real propery situated in…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Sanford v. Duluth & Dakota Elevator Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Bohl v. City of Dell RapidsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1902
  3. Marshall v. Harney Peak Tin Mining, Milling & Manuf'g Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1890
  4. Merchants Nat. Bank v. StebbinsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1901

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Johnson v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Clinkscales v. Wisconsin Granite Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1916
  3. James v. HoldamCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1911
  4. Eversole v. Kentucky River Coal Corp.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1920
  5. Lunschen v. UllomSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1910

8 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