Legal Opinion

Stebbins v. Friend, Crosby & Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 6, 1929No. Nos. 27,416, 27,417PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHilton, J.

Appeal by defendant from orders setting aside judgments in two cases. There is only one question of laAv involved, which is common to both. The appeals were consolidated in this court.

G. S. 1923 (2 Mason, 1927) § 9283, confers power on the district court, at any time Avithin one year after notice thereof, in its discretion, to relieve a party from a judgment taken against him through his mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect. This statute appears as early as 1858 in Comp. St. p. 544, § 94. This provision applies to all judgments ánd not simply to default judgments or judgments…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Crosby v. FarmerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
  2. MacLean v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
  3. Troska v. BrechtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1918
  4. Macknick v. Switchmen's UnionSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
  5. Laplante v. KnutsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Holmes v. ConterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
  2. Gollner v. ChampagneSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
  3. Stebbins v. Friend, Crosby & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
  4. Stebbins v. Friend, Crosby CompanySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
  5. Rieckhoff v. WoodhullMontana Supreme Court · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API