Legal Opinion

Fritz v. Pusey

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 10, 1884PublishedCited by 34 opinions

Appeal by defendant from an order of tbe district court for Ramsey county, Brill, J., presiding, refusing a new trial.

1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.

This action was brought to recover damages for the alleged breach of covenants against incumbrances and for quiet enjoyment in a deed of conveyance executed by defendant to plaintiff, in February, 1881. The evidence tended to prove that, prior to the execution of this deed, defendant had let the premises to one Colwell for the cropping season of 1881, to be by him worked on shares, Colwell to have two-thirds and defendant one-third of the crops; that Colwell was then lawfully in possession under this contract, and so remained until the autumn of 1881; that plaintiff, after obtaining his deed,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Clark v. Estate of ConroeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1866
  2. Murphy v. PriceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
  3. Russ v. SteeleSupreme Court of Vermont · 1868

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Westerlund v. Black Bear Mining Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1913
  2. Winn v. TaylorOregon Supreme Court · 1920
  3. Mackey v. HarmonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
  4. Estep v. BaileyOregon Supreme Court · 1919
  5. Brown v. TaylorTennessee Supreme Court · 1905

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

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

Powered by the Exa API