Schmitt v. Cassilius
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Scott county, Macdonald, J., presiding, striking out the answer as sham and frivolous, and ordering judgment for plaintiff.
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
This appeal is taken from an order striking out the answer as sham, frivolous, and irrelevant, and for judgment notwithstanding the answer.
1. The defendant, whose pleading was thus stricken out, attacks the complaint, claiming that it does not state a cause of action. The complaint alleges that while a suit was pending between the plaintiff and her husband, George Schmitt, in which the title and right of possession of certain premises were in controversy, a receiver was appointed to collect the rents, which he did for the year 1881; that at the commencement of the farming year of 1882, and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gregory v. HayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1853
3Cited by6 opinions
- Ostrander v. OstranderSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1934
- Cousineau v. CousineauOregon Supreme Court · 1936
- Bahnsen v. GilbertSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Schultz v. BrennanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
- Underhill v. Allis-Chalmers Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1926
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.