Legal Opinion

Antonson v. Ekvall

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided March 19, 1971No. 42076PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Per curiam

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment for defendants, Aurel L. Ekvall and the township of Sinclair, and from orders denying plaintiff’s motions for a new trial. The plaintiff in this case sought vacation of a deed, an order requiring defendant township to reconvey and restore possession to her of certain real estate, or, in the alternative, money damages, apparently based on allegations of fraud, misrepresentation, and cheating by defendants. The case was tried on the theories of fraud and rescission. At the close of plaintiff’s case in a jury trial, the court below granted defendants’ motions…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Schlecht v. SchlechtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
  2. Heise v. the JR Clark Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
  3. Tompkins v. SandeenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
  4. Allen v. Central Motors, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1939

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Quill v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
  2. Fritz v. Arnold Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
  3. Pierce v. National Farmers Union Property & Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
  4. Metropolitan Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. AdamsCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
  5. Antonson v. EkvallSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1973

10 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