State v. Crosley Park Land Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for St. Louis county, Ensign, J., setting aside a former order and directing-that a certain application of defendant stand for trial.
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
In proceedings to enforce collection of real-estate taxes for 1892, judgment was entered, on March 20, 1894, in default of answer, against certain real estate of the Orosley Park company,, which will hereafter be called the defendant. At the tax judgment sale in the following May the land was bid in for the state. On May 25, 1895, the defendant made a motion to vacate the judgment and all proceedings thereunder, on the ground that it was void for-want of jurisdiction of the court to render it. The first publication of the delinquent list was on February 12, and the last on February 19, 1894.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Burr v. SeymourSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- Merriman v. KnightSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
3Cited by8 opinions
- Foster v. BrickSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- Engstrom v. Canadian Northern Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1923
- Van Dam v. BakerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
- Foster v. BergSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- Foster v. Golden Valley Land & Cattle Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.