Duenow v. Lindeman
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
Peterson, Justice.
Defendants, having moved to vacate the judgment entered against them by default and for leave to answer, appeal from the order denying their motion.
There are three questions for decision: (1) Whether defendants can raise for the first time on appeal the question whether they were entitled under § 548.16 to notice of the proceedings in which the judgment was entered; (2) whether a default judgment is void for want of jurisdiction where the complaint alleges a cause of action for wrongfully interfering with the natural drainage and flowage <of surface waters from plaintiffs’…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Sache v. WallaceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
- Miller v. LetzerichTexas Supreme Court · 1932
- Scriver v. . SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Matter of Van Etten v. . City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Romans v. NadlerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- Travelers Indemnity Company v. Nationwide Construction CorporationCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1966
- In Re Trust Created by Will of EngerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1948
- Morton v. Board of Com'rs of Ramsey CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
- Cochrane v. Tudor Oaks Condominium ProjectCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1995
- Nguyen v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.