Brown-Forman Co. v. Peterson
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court for Swift county entered in favor of plaintiff pursuant to an order of Qvaíe, J., striking out the answer as sham and ordering judgment.
1Opinion of the CourtStart, C. J.
Appeal by the defendant from the judgment of the district-court of the county of Swift.
■ The only question for our decision is whether the trial court erred in striking out the defendant’s answer as sham. The complaint alleged that the plaintiff was a corporation duly organized under the laws of Kentucky; that on June 20, 1905, the plaintiff at the request of the defendant sold and delivered to him goods of the agreed and reasonable value of $96.43, which sum the defendant promised to pay there-, for; and that no part thereof has been paid. The answer denied each allegation of the complaint,…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Sheets v. RamerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
- Bank of Richards v. SheasgreenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
- J. I. Case Threshing Machine Co. v. BargabosSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
- Estate of Beckwith v. Golden Rule Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1909