Legal Opinion

Law v. Butler

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided November 14, 1890PublishedCited by 17 opinions

, Appeal by defendant from an . order of the district court for Da-iota county, Crosby, J., -presiding, refusing' a new trial.'

1Opinion of the Court

Gilfillan, C.'.J.

Action under the statute to determine adverse claims to real estate, the plaintiff claiming to be the ow'ner in fee. The answer alleges that the title was derived by patent from the -state, the lands having been school lands; that the plaintiff fraudulently procured the patent to be issued to him, when, by reason of *483facts stated in- tbe answer, defendant was entitled, to it, and it ought to have been issued to him and not to plaintiff. The cause was tried below by the court, without a jury, and the court filed its findings of fact, and directed judgment for plaintiff.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Barton v. DrakeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1875
  2. Wilder v. HaugheySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1874
  3. Alt v. BanholzerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
  4. Hammond v. PeytonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Weitzner v. ThingstadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
  2. Bushnell v. LoomisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1911
  3. Withers v. LoveSupreme Court of Kansas · 1905
  4. Murphy v. RennerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
  5. Krueger v. GrothWisconsin Supreme Court · 1926

12 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