McLachlan v. Branch
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court for St. Louis county, where the action (brought under the statute, to determine the defendant’s adverse claim to real property) was tried by jStearns, J.
1Opinion of the CourtGilfillan, C. J.
On appeal on the ground that the evidence is not sufficient to sustain the verdict or finding of fact, the mode of considering, and rule for deciding upon, the evidence is the same, whether the cause was tried in the court below upon written or oral evidence. This rule was established in the case of Humphrey v. Havens, 12 Minn. 196, (298;) and although not since expressed in any opinion except in Dayton v. Buford, 18 Minn. 111, (126,) it has always been acted upon by this court, and is too well established to be questioned. But whether we consider the case upon this rule, or consider it as…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Wilder v. City of Saint PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1866
- McRoberts v. Southern Minnesota RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1871
3Cited by2 opinions
- Prince Investment Co. v. St. Paul & Sioux City Land Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
- Treat v. KelloggSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908