Legal Opinion

Templeton v. Van Dyke

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided November 19, 1926No. 25,604PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilson, C. J.

Plaintiff appealed from an order granting the motion of the garnishee, on special appearance, to dismiss the action for want of jurisdiction.

Both plaintiff and defendant are residents of South Dakota. The cause of action arose out of a promissory note given by defendant to plaintiff’s assignor in that state and payable there. The garnishee is an Indiana corporation qualified to do business in that state and also in this state. It employs defendant in that state where his wages are payable. Can plaintiff prosecute the action in the courts of Minnesota?

In this action the summons and .complaint…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Harris v. BalkSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
  2. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. SturmSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
  3. Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. DeerSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
  4. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. HostetterSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  5. Harvey v. Great Northern Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1892

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Dahlberg v. YoungSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
  2. LaFleur v. SchiffSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1953
  3. Kane v. StallmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
  4. Kane v. StallmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
  5. Nicol Nagel, individually and ESY Investments, LLC, a California limited liability company v. Tracy A. WestenCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2015

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

Powered by the Exa API