Midland Co. v. Eby
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for St. Louis county to determine the adverse claim of defendant to vacant and unoccupied land. The case was tried before Dibell, J., who found in favor of defendant. From an order denying a motion for a new trial, plain' tiff appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.
This action was brought to determine adverse claims made to two separate parcels of land, town lots. The plaintiff, in order to recover, was obliged to rely upon the sufficiency of certain notices to redeem in tax proceedings, issued under the provisions of G. S. 1894, § 1654, in which it is provided, among other things, that “the amount required to redeem” from the tax sale in question must be specified, which section must be construed in connection with section 1602. As to one of these parcels, the second subdivision of section 1602 was applicable, because the lot was *28bid in by tbe state at…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Western Land Ass'n v. McComberSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Parker v. BranchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Snyder v. IngallsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
- Knight v. KnoblauchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
3Cited by8 opinions
- Jenswold v. Minnesota Canal Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1904
- Johnson v. FraserSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
- Telford v. McGillisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
- Phelps v. PowersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
- Fortier v. ParrySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.