Flanigan v. Sable
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendants from an order of the district court for Ramsey county, Brill, L, presiding, denying their motion to file a proposed answer, made after their demurrer to the complaint had been stricken out as frivolous, and-judgment for $1,498.40 entered for plaintiff.
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
The application of defendants for leave to answer was properly denied, for the reason that the proposed answer stated no defence. The action was on certain promissory notes executed by the defendants to the Minnesota Loan 8s Trust Company, and by it assigned to the plaintiff. The proposed answer, after .admitting the execution and assignment of the notes, alleged that to secure these notes the defendants executed to the loan and trust company a mortgage on certain real estate; that afterwards they executed to plaintiff another mortgage on the same property to secure $2,500; that thereafter,…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Marston v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- Ray's Adm'r v. Standard Oil Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1933
- Guaranty Trust Co. of New York v. Minneapolis & St. L. R.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1928
- Mulligan v. Farmers National BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
- State Ex Rel. Inter-State Iron Co. v. WallaceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1936
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.