Close v. Crossland
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action brought in the district court for Morrison county, to recover possession of a horse. At the trial, before Searle, J., the plaintiff had a verdict for possession of the property, or for its value assessed by the jury at $125. He appeals from an order granting a new trial.
1Opinion of the Court
Vanderburgh, J.1
The plaintiff exchanged the horse in controversy here with defendant for a span of ponies. It turned out that the ponies were mortgaged, of which fact the parties were ignorant, they having been brought from another county. The mortgage was overdue, and was given to secure the sum of $450 and interest, and included other property. Within a few days after the trade the mortgagee demanded possession of the ponies of the plaintiff, and the evidence in the case tends to show that he immediately, upon the same day, notified defendant of the claim, and offered to return the ponies,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- McGiffin v. . BairdNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Jewell v. WeedSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1872
- O'Brien v. . JonesNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
- Hunt v. SackettMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
3Cited by15 opinions
- Abdallah, Inc. v. MartinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
- Nave v. PowellIndiana Court of Appeals · 1911
- Clevenger v. LewisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Courtney v. GordonMontana Supreme Court · 1925
- Mauldin v. MilfordSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1924
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.