Nelson v. Larson
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiffs, Andrew Nelson and B. P. Nelson, from a judgment of the District Court of Meeker County, Gorham Powers, J., entered September 22, 1893, that they take nothing by their action. A conversation or agreement should be given the interpretation the parties intended for it, if that intention can be ascertained from the language and conduct of the parties. If the minds of the parties meet the particular form of the language is immaterial.
Read the full summary
Appeal by plaintiffs, Andrew Nelson and B. P. Nelson, from a judgment of the District Court of Meeker County, Gorham Powers, J., entered September 22, 1893, that they take nothing by their action. A conversation or agreement should be given the interpretation the parties intended for it, if that intention can be ascertained from the language and conduct of the parties. If the minds of the parties meet the particular form of the language is immaterial. Pendill v. Neuberger, 67 Mich. 562; Brown v. Orland, 36 Me. 376. To ascertain the meaning of the words used orally between the parties is…
1Opinion of the CourtCanty, J.
The plaintiffs held the promissory note of one Andrew Larson, who died leaving the note partly unpaid. After the widow had applied for letters of administration, one of the plaintiffs had a conversation with her, in which it is claimed he told her he would have to file their claim in the Probate Court before he went to Europe. She answered that he need not; that she would pay it. “You shall not lose a dollar.” She repeated several times that she would pay it, and that he need not file it in the Probate Court, and he answered her, “Then I do not need to bring it to the Probate Court?” and she…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Lillyblad v. SawyerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894
3Cited by2 opinions
- Hanson v. NelsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1901
- Lillyblad v. SawyerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894