Schmidt v. Durnam
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendants, Maurice Durnam, Louisa M. Durnam, and Abisha B. Durnam, from a judgment of the District Court of Hen-nepin county, Hooker, J., entered September 10, 1891. The plaintiff, Emma Schmidt, brought an action against Maurice Durnam, for a breach of his promise to marry her; and on October 28, 1890, obtained a verdict against him for $2,750. Schmidt v. Durnham, 46 Minn. 227. Judgment was entered in that action in her favor, on December 30th, following.
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendants, Maurice Durnam, Louisa M. Durnam, and Abisha B. Durnam, from a judgment of the District Court of Hen-nepin county, Hooker, J., entered September 10, 1891. The plaintiff, Emma Schmidt, brought an action against Maurice Durnam, for a breach of his promise to marry her; and on October 28, 1890, obtained a verdict against him for $2,750. Schmidt v. Durnham, 46 Minn. 227. Judgment was entered in that action in her favor, on December 30th, following. Meantime he conveyed his nonexempt real estate, part to his mother, Louisa Durnam, and the residue to his brother, Abisha…
1Opinion of the Court
(ttt.~ptt.Tian, C. J.
The evidence justified the finding that the deeds were executed for the purpose of hindering and delaying the plaintiff in respect to her verdict. The fact that after the rendition of the verdict, and while there was a stay of proceedings, so that no judg*97ment could be entered, the defendant Maurice made conveyances of his real estate, so that it was vested part in his mother, part in his brother, and part in his wife, is certainly suggestive, and the account the parties as witnesses give of the transaction, instead of removing, goes to confirm, the suspicion thus aroused,…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Langford v. IssenhuthSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1912
- Uhlman v. Farm, Stock & Home Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
- Alexander v. MeyersWisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
- Pfefferkorn v. SeefieldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
- Municipal Court of the City of Providence v. KirbySupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1907