Marsh v. Armstrong
Supreme Court of Minnesota
This is an appeal by defendant from an order, pro Jorma, of the district court for Ramsey county denying his motion for a new trial. The nature of the action, the defense therein, and the exceptions taken upon the trial, are sufficiently stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
McMillan, J.
This action is brought tc recover damages from the defendant for the unlawful taking and detention of certain personal property described in tin complaint. The plaintiffs claim that the intestate, Comstock was the owner and in possession of the property at the tim< it was taken by the defendant. They claim, and there is evi dence tending to show, that he purchased the same fron Henry H. Finley in his own right, and as agent of one S. A Beecher, Finley and Beecher respectively having obtainec title to the same under two chattel mortgages executed t< them respectively…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Minor v. Willoughby & PowersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1859
- Mollison v. EatonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1871
- Buck v. ColbathSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1862
3Cited by10 opinions
- Barrie v. Northern Assurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Rodgers v. United States & Dominion Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
- Warner v. FooteSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- In Re Estate of WalkerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
- White v. GurneySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1904
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.