Legal Opinion

Hissam v. Rusch

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 23, 1926No. 25,493PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Taylor, C.

Plaintiff appeals from an order sustaining a demurrer to his complaint.

The facts stated as constituting the cause of action are briefly as follows:

In July, 1925, plaintiff and defendant made an agreement to exchange properties, plaintiff to convey to defendant a flat building in the city of St. Paul and defendant to convey to plaintiff 400 acres of land and a city lot in the state of Wisconsin. Thereafter they agreed that the title to the Wisconsin land should be examined by an attorney named Andrews residing at Portage, Wisconsin. Andrews examined the titles and made his report on…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Paynesville Land Co. v. GrabowSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
  2. Payson v. EverettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1867
  3. Herrick v. NewellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
  4. Paine v. SherwoodSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1872
  5. Trainer v. LammersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Sheridan County v. HandNebraska Supreme Court · 1926

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

Powered by the Exa API