Sonnenberg v. Riedel
Supreme Court of Minnesota
This action was brought in the district court for Hennepin county, and was tried by a referee, who reported judgment for the defendant. The plaintiff moved in the court below for judgment, notwithstanding the report, and for a new trial, upon the ground that the report was not justified by the evidence and was contrary to law.
Read the full summary
This action was brought in the district court for Hennepin county, and was tried by a referee, who reported judgment for the defendant. The plaintiff moved in the court below for judgment, notwithstanding the report, and for a new trial, upon the ground that the report was not justified by the evidence and was contrary to law. Both motions were denied by the district court, and the plaintiff appeals from the order denying his motions and directing judgment to be entered according to the report of the referee. The facts found by the referee, and the points made by the plaintiff are…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court
Ripley, Ch. J.
The referee who tried this case finds, that on the 12th January, 1867, the defendant owed the plaintiff $300 and some accrued interest, which would become due on the first of March, 1867. That on said 12th day of January, the defendant paid to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff received the sum of $100, in full of said debt. That the plaintiff’s motive in so doing, was compassion for defendant’s misfortune in having shortly before been burned out.
Plaintiff in this action sues for the balance of said debt. The law on this subject of accepting par,t in satisfaction of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Stewart v. Samuel HiddenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1868
3Cited by3 opinions
- Schweider v. LangSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1882
- Clark v. AbbottSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- In re Assignment of GilbertWisconsin Supreme Court · 1896