Schaeffer v. Rush
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Hennepin county to recover $2,000, procured through fraudulent representations, and a second cause of action for $135, balance alleged to be due for services rendered. The substance of the complaint is given in the opinion. The answer was a general denial.
Read the full summary
Action in the district court for Hennepin county to recover $2,000, procured through fraudulent representations, and a second cause of action for $135, balance alleged to be due for services rendered. The substance of the complaint is given in the opinion. The answer was a general denial. The case was tried before Holt, J., who, when plaintiff rested, granted defendant’s motion to dismiss as to the second cause of action, and at the close of the testimony denied defendant’s motion to direct a verdict in his favor, and a jury which returned a verdict in 'favor of plaintiff for $2,200. From an…
1Opinion of the CourtBeowet, J.
Action to recover money alleged to have been fraudulently obtained from plaintiff, in which plaintiff had a verdict, and defendant appealed from an order denying his alternative motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial.
The complaint in substance alleges: That on January 24, 1910, defendant knowingly, falsely, and fraudulently represented to plaintiff that he (defendant) intended forthwith to organize or cause to be organized a corporation, with a capital stock of $35,000, for the purpose of taking over and continuing the merchant tailoring business then and theretofore…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Busterud v. FarringtonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- McElrath v. Electric Investments Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1911
- Pott v. HansonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
3Cited by2 opinions
- Smith v. VosikaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
- Roman v. LorenceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925