Legal Opinion

Page v. Mitchell

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided October 28, 1887PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the municipal court of Minneapolis.

1Opinion of the CourtVanderburgh, J.

The defendant’s answer sets up the pendency of a former suit between the same parties for the same cause, and also a separate defence upon the merits. The two defences were properly united in the same answer. The plaintiff’s reply admits the-former action, but alleges dismissal, and puts in issue the further allegations in the answer. At the trial the defence upon the merits failed; and as to the plea in abatement, it is found by the court that at the time of the service of the summons in this action a notice of dismissal of the former suit was also served on the defendant, *369and was…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Miller v. TroostSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1869
  2. Beals v. CameronNew York Supreme Court · 1849
  3. Chamberlain v. EckertU.S. Circuit Court for the Northern District of Illnois · 1869
  4. O'Beirne v. LloydThe Superior Court of New York City · 1869

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Gibson v. NelsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
  2. Manufacturers' Bottle Co. v. Taylor-Stites Glass Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
  3. Althen v. TarboxSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
  4. Walker v. VandiverTennessee Supreme Court · 1915
  5. Nichols v. State BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API