Legal Opinion · Dissent

Mogan v. Carter

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided March 7, 1892Published

Appeal by defendant Michael A., Harmon from an order of the district court of Hennepin county, Smith, J., made June 22, 1891, overruling his demurrer to the complaint.

Read the full summary

Appeal by defendant Michael A., Harmon from an order of the district court of Hennepin county, Smith, J., made June 22, 1891, overruling his demurrer to the complaint. The plaintiff Patrick Mogan and thirty-four others filed their complaint against Josephine A. Garter, Michael A. Harmon, and John H. Burke, defendants, alleging that each plaintiff owned in severalty and was in the actual possession of a lot in Carter’s addition to Minneapolis; that E. W. Cutter was on June 1, 1874, the owner of all said thirty-five lots, and on that day conveyed them to Frederick G. Mayo, and took back from…

1DissentMitchell, J.

I dissent, for the reasons given by me in Maloney v. Finnegan, 38 Minn. 70, (35 N. W. Rep. 723.)

(Opinion published 51 N. W. Rep. 614.)

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Foster v. DearbornSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
  2. Maloney v. FinneganSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887

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

Powered by the Exa API