Legal Opinion

Keator v. Glaspie

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided November 11, 1890PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Action brought in the district court for Washington county, to recover $88,158 damages for alleged fraudulent representations by defendant on a sale of pine lands to plaintiff. At the commencement of the action a writ of attachment was issued and levied on defendant’s property. The defendant answered, denying the fraud charged. A trial by jury resulted in a disagreement, w'hereupon the action was continued until the next term of court, when it was again called for trial.

Read the full summary

Action brought in the district court for Washington county, to recover $88,158 damages for alleged fraudulent representations by defendant on a sale of pine lands to plaintiff. At the commencement of the action a writ of attachment was issued and levied on defendant’s property. The defendant answered, denying the fraud charged. A trial by jury resulted in a disagreement, w'hereupon the action was continued until the next term of court, when it was again called for trial. Plaintiffs’ counsel waived a jury, and announced that plaintiffs declined to appear, and the action was set for trial by…

1Opinion of the CourtVanderburgh, J.

At the common law, if the plaintiff failed to appear at the trial, he was nonsuited,'and there was and could be no trial or decision on the merits in his absence. The subject is regulated by the statute in this state providing for the dismissal of actions. Gen. St. 1878, c. 66, §§ 262, 263. And by subdivision 4 of section 262, the action may be dismissed without a final determination of the merits, “by the court, when the plaintiff fails to appear at the trial, and the defendant appears and asks for the dismissal.” This simply regulates the former practice. There is no provision in *449the…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Comstock v. BoyleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1908
  2. Sell v. SellMontana Supreme Court · 1920
  3. Clowser v. NolandMissouri Court of Appeals · 1897
  4. Boyle v. AdamsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
  5. Hineline v. Minneapolis Honeywell RegulatorCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1935

1 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