Legal Opinion

Quinn v. Olson

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 18, 1886PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Appeal by plaintiffs from an order of the district court for Wright county, Lochren, J., presiding, refusing a new trial.

1Opinion of the CourtDicKinson, J.

Action for ejectment. The facts found by the court which we have occasion to consider, may be briefly stated as follows: Both parties claim under a corporation known as “C. Aultman & Co.,”- the former owner of the land. In February, 1881, C. Ault-man & Co. entered into a contract in writing with the defendant for the sale of the land to him, under which the defendant was given the possession of the land, which he has ever since retained. Payments of the purchase price to the amount of $200 were made. One hundred and sixteen dollars and sixty-seven cents of the purchase price became due, by…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Coles v. ShepardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
  2. Paulman v. CheneyNebraska Supreme Court · 1885

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Tingue v. PatchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1904
  2. O'Connor v. HughesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
  3. Seeley v. Security National BankIdaho Supreme Court · 1925
  4. Speer v. PhillipsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1909
  5. Malmquist v. PetersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1921

7 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