Legal Opinion

Dodge v. McMahan

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided May 24, 1895No. Nos. 9295—(145)PublishedCited by 11 opinions

• Appeal by defendant from an order of tbe district court for Marshall copnty, Ives, J., denying a motion for a new trial.

1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.

This was an action to recover money “loaned to tbe defendant, and paid for bis use and benefit.” Tbe answer was a general denial. Tbe plaintiffs offered evidence tending to prove-that tbe defendant employed them, as commission men, to buy for bim 5,000 bushels of wheat for future delivery, on a margin of five cents per bushel, and at tbe same time requested them, if this margin should be exhausted by a decline in tbe market, not to allow bim to be “sold out,” but to put up the additional margins for him, and then advise bim -or draw on bim for tbe amount; that tbe amount sued for was money…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Brown v. EatonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1875
  2. Powers v. AmesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1864
  3. Lautenschlager v. HunterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1875

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Raymond v. McKenzieSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1945
  2. Trovatten v. HansonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
  3. Hahn v. BettingenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
  4. Cook v. KittsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
  5. Van Dusen-Harrington Co. v. JungeblutSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899

6 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