Glaspie v. Glassow
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Washington county, Crosby, J., presiding, refusing a new trial. cited Baldwin v. Bennett, 4 Cal. •392; Coffee v. Meiggs, 9 Cal. 364; Hunt v. Test, 8 Ala; 713; Miller v. Ward, 2 Conn. 494; Dodge v. B,ogers, 9 Minn. 209 (223;) Danley v. Williams, 16 Wis. 581.
1Opinion of the CourtGilfillan, C. J.
On March 29, 1879, plaintiff and defendant entered into a written contract, whereby plaintiff agreed, within a specified time, to drive or cause to be driven into the boom at Still-water all logs of defendant of a certain mark, amounting to 830,000 feet, and then landed on the bank of the Kettle river, for which defendant agreed to pay him 75 cents per thousand feet when the logs should be driven into the boom, and all liens for laborers’ wages for driving logs satisfied. Plaintiff brings this action, alleging full performance of the contract by him, claiming compensation at the contract rate…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Baldwin v. BennettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1854
3Cited by9 opinions
- Swanson v. AndrusSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1901
- Mississippi & Rum River Boom Co. v. PrinceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
- Baessetti v. Shenango Furnace Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- Jewett v. WilmotNebraska Supreme Court · 1897
- Silberstein v. Duluth News-Tribune Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.