Legal Opinion

Estes v. Roberts

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 19, 1895No. Nos. 9669-(178)PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal by defendants from an order of the district court for Ramsey county, Brill, J., sustaining a demurrer to the answer.

1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.

This was an action upon an undertaking executed to plaintiff by defendants under the provisions of G-. S. 1894, § 7989, in order to obtain a stay of the entry of judgment pending an appeal to this court from an order denying a motion for a new trial *266■in an action in the district court for Ramsey county between this plaintiff and the Lovering Shoe Company, a corporation, in which action the verdict of the jury was in favor of this plaintiff. The undertaking was conditioned as, and by law had the effect of, the supersedeas bond prescribed by G. S. 1894, § 6142.

It seems to be admitted that the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Reitan v. GoebelSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
  2. Friesenhahn v. MerrillSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Vent v. Duluth Trust Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1899

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API