Legal Opinion

American Fountain Supply & Products, Inc. v. California Crushed Fruit Corp.

District Court, D. Minnesota

Decided August 10, 1927No. 1725PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JOHN B. SANBORN, District Judge.

This cause was commenced in the state district court against the defendant, a resident of California. Jurisdiction was obtained through garnishment, and the summons was served "in California. Tho tim'e to answer would have expired June 28,1927, except for a stipulation, entered into by the attorneys, extending the time “to move, plead, demur, or answer” for an additional period of 20 days. Within .the time to answer as extended, but after June 28th, the ease was removed to this court. It appears that, as a condition of being granted additional time to answer,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Martin's Administrator v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
  2. Kansas City, Fort Scott & Memphis Railroad v. DaughtrySupreme Court of the United States · 1891
  3. Nichols v. StevensSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
  4. Austin v. GaganU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern California · 1889
  5. Greeley v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1894

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Ransom v. Sipple Truck Lines, Inc.District Court, N.D. Iowa · 1943
  2. Saldibar v. Heiland Research Corp.District Court, S.D. Texas · 1940
  3. Coco v. AltheimerDistrict Court, W.D. Louisiana · 1942
  4. Yuba City Box Co. v. Liverpool & London & Globe Ins.District Court, N.D. California · 1929
  5. McGhee v. High Mountain Health LLCDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2020

1 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