Legal Opinion

Merritt v. Putnam

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 15, 1862PublishedCited by 6 opinions

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF WASHINGTON COUNTY.

1Opinion of the Court

By the Qowrt

Elandrau, J.

This is an appeal from an order denying the Defendant Putnam leave to serve an amended answer and have a judgment opened which had been taken against him, as he alleges, by his inadvertance, surprise and excusable neglect. It would be enough to refer the party bringing- thiá appeal to the case of Myrick vs. Pierce, 5 Minn. R., 65, where we held that motions of this character are addressed to the discretion of the Court. The Defendant asks a favor, not a right; the Judge grants or refuses the application as under all the circumstances he may think will best subserve the…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Welch v. ChallenSupreme Court of Kansas · 1884
  2. Evans v. Fall River CountySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1893
  3. Thomas v. MorrisUtah Supreme Court · 1892
  4. Whitcomb v. ShafferSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1866
  5. Horton v. New Pass Gold & Silver Mining Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1891

1 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