Legal Opinion

Automotive Merchandise, Inc. v. Smith

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided November 9, 1973No. 44005PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendants appeal from a default judgment entered in a replevin action and seek to first raise the constitutionality of said proceedings in this court. We affirm.

Plaintiff, pursuant to a security agreement given to it by defendants, commenced an action in replevin in the district court. Pursuant to statute plaintiff filed an affidavit, requisition, and bond, which was approved by the sheriff, and plaintiff’s counsel accompanied the sheriff to defendants’ place of business.

There, the sheriff served the replevin process, but while they were on defendants’ premises, counsel for defendants…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Schoepke v. Alexander Smith & Sons Carpet Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1971
  3. Ukkonen v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1968

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. McGuire v. C & L RESTAURANT INC.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
  2. Olson v. Ford Motor Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
  3. State v. EngholmSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
  4. Zappa v. FaheySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
  5. Hampton v. HamptonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975

9 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