Legal Opinion
The Marckel Co. v. Raven
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided May 6, 1932No. 28,899PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDibell, J.
Action to recover of the defendant Elizabeth Raven upon her verbal promise to pay the purchase price of a heating plant sold by the plaintiff to one M. B. Purdy, her son-in-law, and installed in a house which she had sold him. There ivas a verdict for $479.42 for the plaintiff. The defendant appeals from the judgment. She claims that her promise to pay, if one ivas made, was Avithin the statute of frauds as a promise to answer for the debt of another.
The statute of frauds, G. S. 1923 (2 Mason, 1927) § 8456, provides:
“No action shall be maintained, in either of the following cases, upon any…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Grant v. WolfSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
- Holm v. SandbergSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
- In re Hummel's EstateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
3Cited by6 opinions
- Willmar Gas Co. Inc. v. DuininckSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1953
- Rolfsmeyer v. RauSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1936
- Mitchell Feed & Seed, Inc. v. MitchellCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
- Smith v. Minneapolis Securities Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
- Swanson v. SwansonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1936
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.