Knappen v. Freeman
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Henne-pin county, refusing a new trial after a trial before Smith, J., and judgment ordered for defendant.
1Opinion of the CourtGileillan, C. J.
Action on a promissory note. The answer contains — First, what is evidently intended for a defence-to the note; second, what is pleaded as a counterclaim, and on which affirmative relief a judgment for money is demanded. The defence alleges that the note was given upon and for a part of the consideration of a sale and conveyance of real estate by plaintiff to defendant. That, to induce him to-make the purchase, the plaintiff falsely and fraudulently represented to him that the land was high and rolling, eov-, ered with a growth of scrub oak, and good farming land suitable for cultivation, and…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Bennett v. . JudsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- Krumm v. . BeachNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
- Bullitt v. FarrarSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Busch v. WilcoxMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- Haven v. NealSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by52 opinions
- Abdallah, Inc. v. MartinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
- Swanson v. DomningSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
- I. L. Corse & Co. v. Minnesota Grain Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1905
- St. Louis S. F. Ry. Co. v. RichardsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
- Hamlin v. AbellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.