Knoblauch v. Foglesong
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Hennepin county on a promissory note for $500, made by defendants, bearing date May 5,1883, and payable two years after date to the order of Peter Thompson, and by him indorsed to plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Hennepin county on a promissory note for $500, made by defendants, bearing date May 5,1883, and payable two years after date to the order of Peter Thompson, and by him indorsed to plaintiff. The defendants, in their answer, allege that the note in suit is one of two notes of equal amount given at the same time, and secured by mortgage of even date, executed by defendants to Thompson, upon certain described real estate; that both notes and the mortgage were transferred to plaintiff, and that one of the notes has been paid. The answer also…
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
The disposition of this case is much embarrassed by irregular practice and loose pleading. If the point had been made, the demurrers should have been overruled, on the ground that a demurrer will only lie to a whole pleading, or to the whole of a particular cause of action or defence. It cannot be directed to a portion only of a single cause of action or defence, for the manifest reason that a demurrer raises an issue of law upon which the court is to render judgment. Bass v. Upton, 1 Minn. 292, (408;) Daniels v. Bradley, 4 Minn. 105, (158;) Armstrong v. Hinds, 9 Minn. 341, (356.)
But we think…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- United States v. GideonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1856
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. Chicago Great Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1946
- Alansky v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1947
- Steenerson v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
- Bennett v. BennettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
- Sleichert v. TurekAppellate Court of Illinois · 1930