Cobb v. Cole
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiffs, Llewellyn A. Cobb and Alfred F. Norrish, formerly copartners as Cobb & Norrish, from an order of the District Court of Dakota County, Crosby, J., made March 22, 1892, refusing a new trial. On November 30, 1888, the plaintiffs, Llewellyn A. Cobb and Alfred F. Norrish, and the defendant, John E. Cole, were equal partners, dealing in grain at Minneapolis as L. A. Cobb & Co. On that date, the firm dissolved by mutual agreement.
Read the full summary
Appeal by plaintiffs, Llewellyn A. Cobb and Alfred F. Norrish, formerly copartners as Cobb & Norrish, from an order of the District Court of Dakota County, Crosby, J., made March 22, 1892, refusing a new trial. On November 30, 1888, the plaintiffs, Llewellyn A. Cobb and Alfred F. Norrish, and the defendant, John E. Cole, were equal partners, dealing in grain at Minneapolis as L. A. Cobb & Co. On that date, the firm dissolved by mutual agreement. It was agreed that Cole should retire from the firm, and should be paid his one-third interest therein. The bookkeeper made a statement of what the…
1Opinion of the CourtDickinson, J.
After the decision of this court on a former appeal in this action, 44 Minn. 278, (46 N. W. Rep. 364,) the order for judgment in favor of the defendant, which had been made by the district court, was set aside by that court, and an order made directing a further trial of the cause, as to issues not theretofore tried. When the cause was again brought to trial, the court directed, the parties consenting, that at that hearing no evidence should be submitted except as to the point whether the sale by the defendant to the plaintiffs, of the interest of the former in the partnership, was “for a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Cobb v. ColeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
3Cited by3 opinions
- Osbon v. HartfielSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1937
- Dwinnell v. OftedahlSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1952
- Cobb v. ColeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893