Legal Opinion

Greengard v. Fretz

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 28, 1896No. Nos. 9795-(260)PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Morrison county, Baxter, J., denying a motion for a new trial.

1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.

This action was upon a bond executed to procure the discharge of a co-partnership garnishee, conditioned as provided in G-. S. 1894, § 5342. It was recited in this instrument that plaintiff had commenced an action against the defendant, and had garnished money, property, and effects of the latter in the hands of the garnishee. On the trial it was shown by the plaintiff that the garnishee, at the time of the service of the summons, was indebted to the defendant therein in a sum in excess of the judgment recovered by plaintiff in the original action, unless the claim had previously been…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Birdsall v. WheelerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1890
  2. Peterson v. WoollenSupreme Court of Kansas · 1892
  3. Easton v. GoodwinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1876

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1910
  2. Dale Ex Rel. Smith v. PushorSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1956
  3. Red Wing Sewer Pipe Co. v. DonnellySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
  4. Wilkinson v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
  5. O'Harrow v. PfutzenreuterSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1927

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

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

Powered by the Exa API