Nash v. Kirschoff
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.
Defendants appeal from an order denying their motion for amended findings or a new trial.
The action involves the title to about four acres of improved land near the city of Minneapolis, known as lot 2 of Yale Company’s Garden Lots. Plaintiff claims to be in possession as the sole heir of her deceased husband, Fred W. Nash, whose homestead it was when he died.
The facts are in substance these: Fred W. Nash and plaintiff were married in 1891, lived together for about 17 years, and during the last three years thereof were partners in a small manufacturing business. In 1908 they settled up their…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Babbitt v. BennettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
- Newell v. CochranSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Hooper v. VanstrumSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1904
- Haaven v. HoaasSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
- Nelson v. NelsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1921
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- In Re Estate of JeruzalSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1964
- Nash v. KirschoffSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
- McGrath v. PothenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Georgen-Running v. Bidwell (In Re Bidwell)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota · 2005
- Nash v. KirschoffSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.