Brand v. Williams
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiffs from a judgment of the district court for Lyon county, entered on defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings.
Read the full summary
Appeal by plaintiffs from a judgment of the district court for Lyon county, entered on defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. The ease is stated in the opinion. cited Hall v. Carpen, 27 Ill. 385; Trumbull v. Campbell, 8 Ill. 502; Gammon v. Butler, 48 Me. 344; Kcr v. Osborne, 9 Bast, 378; Tope v. Hoekin, 7 B. & C. 101; Pinto v. Santos, 5 Taunt. 447; Smith v. Howland, 18 Ala. 665 ; Vrancx v. Ross, 98 Mass. 591; Bigeloiv v. Davis, 16 Barb. 561; Stephens v. Badcock, 3 B. & Adolph. 354; Robbins v. Fennell, 11 Q. B. 248; Maddox v. Kennedy, 2 Rich. (S. C.) 102; Sims v. Brittain, 4 B. &…
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
An action for money had and received can be maintained whenever one man has received or obtained the possession of the money of another, which he ought in equity and good conscience to pay over. This proposition is elementary. There need be no privity between the parties, or any promise to pay, other than that which results or is implied from one man’s having another’s money, which he has no right conscientiously to retain. In such case the equitable principle upon which the action is founded implies the contract and the promise. When the fact is proved that he has the money, if he cannot…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Eagle Bank of New-Haven v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1823
- Allen v. StengerIllinois Supreme Court · 1874
- Legard v. GholsonCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 1852
3Cited by58 opinions
- Youngstown Mines Corp. v. ProutSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1963
- Daigle v. Ford Motor Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2010
- Field v. BrownIndiana Supreme Court · 1896
- Olson v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
- Walker v. ConantMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.