State ex rel. Schmitt v. Macdonald
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Order to show cause why a writ of mandamus should not be issued, directing respondent, as judge of the district court for Scott county, to restore certain statements in a proposed case winch had been stricken out by the court when it was presented for settlement. A. former application for the writ was considered by this court in State T. Macdonald, 29 Minn. 440.
1Opinion of the Court
Yanderbdegh, J.*'
In the case of Elizabeth Schmitt against George Schmitt, in the district court of Scott county, the defendant’s proposed case, with the plaintiff’s proposed amendments thereto, was by stipulation submitted to his honor Judge Macdonald for settlement, without any discussion or argument of counsel. Thereupon he allowed two of. the amendments, striking out certain portions of the case as proposed, and which defendant deems important and necessary to represent certain alleged omissions and irregularities in the proceedings, which, as he claims, seriously affected his rights. The…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- People on rel. Adams v. BakerNew York Supreme Court · 1861
- Delavan v. Boardman & WhiteNew York Supreme Court · 1830
- State ex rel. Long v. CoxSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1879
- O'Gorman v. KamakNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1875
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. RonkSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1904
- Richardson v. RogersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Schumann v. MarkSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
- State v. AtanosoffSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917