Legal Opinion

In re Harrison

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 11, 1891PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal by Charles P. Kellogg & Co., creditors of the insolvent,, from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Young, J.,. presiding, dismissing (without prejudice) their petition for an examination of the insolvent, etc.

1Opinion of the CourtGilfillan, C. J.

Harrison made an assignment of all his property under the insolvent law to McMullan, who accepted the trust. Charles P. Kellogg & Co., creditors, who had proved their claim, filed a petition under section 10 of the insolvent law, as amended by Laws 1889, c. 30, § 7, asking an order that the insolvent remain within the jurisdiction of the court, and requiring him to appear before the court, and produce and exhibit all books of account, records, and papers relating to his business, and submit himself and said books to a full examination by the petitioners, as to all his business affairs, so *332far…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. In re GazettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
  2. In re HowesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
  3. In re DalpaySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Ekberg v. SchlossSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
  2. Beuning Family LP v. County of StearnsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
  3. In re FleishmanDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1902

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

Powered by the Exa API