Humphreys v. Minnesota Clay Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court for Anoka county, entered pursuant to the findings and order of Giddings, J.
1Opinion of the CourtStart, C. J.
Action for *the conversion by the defendant of twenty nine shares of its capital stock of which the plaintiff was the alleged owner. The cause was tried by the court without a jury, and findings of fact made in favor of the plaintiff .to the effect that the defendant converted the stock, whereby the plaintiff sustained damages in the sum of *470$1,901.36, the value of the stock, for which amount judgment was directed for the plaintiff. It was so entered, and the defendant appealed from the judgment.
1. The first contention of the defendant is that the complaint does not state a cause of action. It…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Nicollet National Bank v. City BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co. v. BrackettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Allen v. American Building & Loan Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
- Harrow v. St. Paul & Duluth RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- Cumbey v. UelandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
3Cited by11 opinions
- DLH, Inc. v. RussSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- Montecalvo v. MandarelliSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1996
- Duroth Manufacturing Co. v. CauffielSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
- Uhlman v. Farm, Stock & Home Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
- McLeod-nash Motors, Inc. v. Commercial Credit TrustSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.