Fulton v. Town of Riverton
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action brought in the district court for Clay county to r’ecover $150 on interest coupons of bonds issued by defendant for drainage purposes. Defence that the petition for the issue of the bonds was not signed by the requisite number of legal voters. The action was tried by Mills, J., who found that the plaintiffs were bona fide purchasers for value and ordered judgment in their favor. A new trial was refused, and the defendant appealed. •
1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.
1. Upon appellant’s first assignment of error, we need but to say that the court below found as a fact that the defendant township made, executed, and delivered the bonds with the attached interest coupons herein involved, and such finding is conclusive here, in the absence of the testimony offered and received upon the trial.
2. The second assignment raises the question as to whether these bonds and coupons are valid in the hands of innocent and bona fide purchasers for value, as against the defendant. This question must be answered in the affirmative, and was practically settled in…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Gelpcke v. DubuqueSupreme Court of the United States · 1864
- Town of Coloma v. EavesSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Board of Comm'rs of Knox Cty. v. AspinwallSupreme Court of the United States · 1859
- Evansville, Indianapolis & Cleveland Straight Line Railroad v. City of EvansvilleIndiana Supreme Court · 1860
- Northern Bank of Toledo v. Porter Township TrusteesSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Wm. N. Coler & Co. v. Dwight School TownshipNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1893
- St. Paul Gaslight Co. v. Village of SandstoneSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
- Lumaghi v. AbtMissouri Court of Appeals · 1907
- Hamilton v. Village of DetroitSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1901
- White v. City of ChatfieldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.