Roesler v. Union Hay Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Waseca county to recover $63.50 for a carload of straw. The facts in relation to the application for a change of venue are stated in the opinion. The motion of defendant hay company for judgment notwithstanding the verdict was denied, Childress, J. Prom the order denying the motion, defendant hay company appealed.
1Opinion of the Court
Peb Ctjbiam.
This action was brought to recover for a carload of straw sold by defendant Matz to defendant hay company. Matz assigned his claim to plaintiff, and guaranteed that it would be paid in full within a reasonable time. Plaintiff brought this action, making the hay company and Matz defend*490ants, seeking a recovery from both defendants, the cause of action against Matz being based on his guaranty. Defendant hay company filed and served an affidavit and demand for a change of venue to Hennepin county, where its place of business is, alleging that Matz, who resided in Waseca county, was…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Singer v. SingerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
- State ex rel. Clark v. QuinnSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
- Guaranty Corp. v. SteigmanNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1932