Legal Opinion

Michaud v. Eisenmenger

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 1, 1891PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Ramsey county, Brill, J., presiding, refusing a new trial after judgment ordered for plaintiff.

1Opinion of the CourtDickinson, J.

This is an action to rescind, and to have cancelled, & contract for the sale by the defendant to the plaintiffs of a lot of .land described as “Lot 5 in J. F. Eisenmenger’s Lake Villas,” a platted tract of land in Ramsey county. The ground of the relief sought, and upon which it was granted, was the fraudulent representation of the defendant that the lot contained five acres of land, *406the price being agreed upon at $150 an acre. Thereupon the written contract of sale was executed, in which the price to be paid was-stated to be $750. This lot was 160 feet wide; one side was 1,195' feet long;…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. McCall v. BushnellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Straabe v. JacksonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
  2. Labar v. LindstromSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
  3. Kautenberger v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915

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

Powered by the Exa API