Brainard v. Hastings
Supreme Court of Minnesota
This was a "Writ of Error to the District Court of Ramsey County. The suit was brought by Hastings to obtain a division and partition of certain real estate in Bamsey County. The pleadings present a number of issues of fact, and the cause was referred, by consent, to George W. Prescott, Esq., to hear the testimony and report the facts.
Read the full summary
This was a "Writ of Error to the District Court of Ramsey County. The suit was brought by Hastings to obtain a division and partition of certain real estate in Bamsey County. The pleadings present a number of issues of fact, and the cause was referred, by consent, to George W. Prescott, Esq., to hear the testimony and report the facts. Upon the filing of his report, the Plaintiff moved for the relief demanded in his complaint, and the Defendant filed certain exceptions to the report. Upon the hearing the District Court gave a decree in favor of the Plaintiff. As the Court refused to review…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Cowrt
— Atwater, J.
It is urged by the counsel for the Plaintiff in Error, that this Court should review the finding of the Beferee, before whom the cause was heard, on questions of fact found by him. We might perhaps have that power on appeal, but this case comes before us on'a Writ of Error, and we find no authority which goes to the extent of granting or conceding such power in reviewing cases on Writ of Error. We are cited to 7 Wend. 178 and 25 do. 143, but those cases do not hold such a doctrine. The case of Burhcums *50vs. Van Zandt, 7 Bar. 91, was brought before the General Term of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- James v. HubbardNew York Court of Chancery · 1828
- Patty v. PeaseNew York Court of Chancery · 1840
- Doyle's adm'rs v. St. James' ChurchNew York Supreme Court · 1831