Thompson v. Hanson
Supreme Court of Minnesota
This action was brought in the district court for Nobles county, upon the promissory note mentioned in the opinion, and defendants appeal from the judgment rendered in plaintiff’s favor, after a trial by Farmer, J., (acting for the judge of the 6th district) without a jury.
Read the full summary
This action was brought in the district court for Nobles county, upon the promissory note mentioned in the opinion, and defendants appeal from the judgment rendered in plaintiff’s favor, after a trial by Farmer, J., (acting for the judge of the 6th district) without a jury. The reply alleged “that said defendant Hanson and plaintiff agreed to and with each other that plaintiff should and would obtain from said Holm a surrender and cancellation to the United States of the entry of said Holm on said land, and thereupon, as soon as the said land was open to entry, that plaintiff would and should…
1Opinion of the CourtBerry, J.
Prior to April 6, 1878, one Holm had a valid and subsisting entry, at the United States land-office at Worthington, of a certain quarter-section of land, under the timber-culture acts of congress. He had delivered his certificate of entry to the plaintiff, with his surrender written thereon; and on April 6, 1878, plaintiff, with his consent* filed the same in said land-office. Under the rules of the general land-office at Washington, the officers of the Worthington land-office were required to notify the plaintiff when the entry was cancelled. In this instance the entry was cancelled July 1,…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Coleman v. the Territory of OklahomaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1897
- Tecumseh State Bank v. MaddoxSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1896
- McCabe v. CanerMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Tecumseh State Bank v. MaddoxSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1896