Legal Opinion

Thornton Bros. Co. v. Memorial Park Assn. Inc.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 6, 1934No. 29,900Published

1Opinion of the Court

HOLT, Justice.

Defendant appeals from the order denying its motion for a new trial.

Plaintiff is a corporation and contracted with defendant, a corporation, to do grading in its cemetery. The work was actually done by a subcontractor, Martin Wunderlich. The action is to recover for a balance due. The answer alleged payment and counterclaimed on the ground that at stated places more earth was removed than called for by the contract, necessitating the lowering, at an expense, of the watermains installed. It was stipulated that if the plaintiff be denied recovery then defendant may be given a…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Shaw v. First Baptist Church of WinonaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
  2. Walberg v. JacobsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
  3. Carson v. City of DawsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915

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

Powered by the Exa API