Legal Opinion

Pennig v. Schmitz

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 9, 1933No. 29,506PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STONE, Justice.

Trover, wherein plaintiff had a verdict. Defendants, husband and wife, appeal from the order denying their motion for judgment notwithstanding or a new trial.

In November, 1923, plaintiff sold a warm air furnace to defendants under conditional sales contract and installed it in their home. In August, 1927, when $233.50 was still unpaid on the contract, defendants sold their dwelling, together with the furnace. The purchasers took possession without knowledge that the furnace was not paid for.

The furnace remaining plaintiff’s property under the conditional sales contract, because…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hunt v. Bay State Iron Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1867
  2. Detroit Steel Cooperage Co. v. Sistersville Brewing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1914
  3. Alden v. Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
  4. Bromich v. BurkholderSupreme Court of Kansas · 1916
  5. Holland Furnace Co. v. JeffersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Nathan v. St. Paul Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
  2. Thiesen v. HellermannSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
  3. Conner v. CaldwellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1940
  4. Hamilton v. ThurberDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1944

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

Powered by the Exa API