Nelson v. Charles Betcher Lumber Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Goodhue county to recover $4,135.65 and interest, for saw logs sold and delivered to defendant. The case was tried before Williston, J., who found in favor of plaintiff. From an order granting a motion for a new trial, plaintiffs appealed. Proofs cannot go beyond the averments of the pleadings. It has been expressly held by this court that an answer assailing a scale bill for fraud will not permit proof of mistake.
Read the full summary
Action in the district court for Goodhue county to recover $4,135.65 and interest, for saw logs sold and delivered to defendant. The case was tried before Williston, J., who found in favor of plaintiff. From an order granting a motion for a new trial, plaintiffs appealed. Proofs cannot go beyond the averments of the pleadings. It has been expressly held by this court that an answer assailing a scale bill for fraud will not permit proof of mistake. Leighton v. Grant, 20 Minn. 298 (345). How, then, can proof be received of either fraud or mistake, where the accuracy of the scale bill is not…
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
Action to recover an unpaid balance of the purchase price of a quantity of pine saw logs sold by plaintiffs to defendant at $13 per *520thousand feet. The case was tried without a jury, and the court found in favor of plaintiffs.. From an order granting defendant’s motion for a new trial, plaintiffs appealed.
The facts are substantially as follows: The firm of Walker & Akeley owned a quantity of pine saw logs in the northern part of the state, which were marked by a log mark "crab W.” The logs were sold by that firm to plaintiffs, and driven down the Mississippi river to Minneapolis. In August,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Bryant v. LivermoreSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1874
- St. Paul & Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. BradburySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- St. Anthony Falls Water Power Co. v. EastmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1874
- Boyle v. Musser-Sauntry Land, Logging & Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
- Langdon v. NorthfieldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Cournoyer v. American Television & Radio Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
- Sanitary Farm Dairies, Inc. v. GammelCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1952
- Cudlipp v. C. R. Cummings Export Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1912
- Hayday v. Hammermill Paper Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
- Fortier v. Skibo Timber Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.