Blodgett v. Hollo
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
Loring, Justice.
This was a suit to set aside a conveyance as fraudulent as to creditors, and it comes here on appeal by plaintiff from an order denying his alternative motion for amended findings of fact and conclusions of law or for a new trial. We review only the motion for new trial.
March 29, 1930, defendants John M. Hollo and Lizzie Hollo, his wife, gave their promissory note for $2,000 to Mathilda Blodgett, Mrs. Hollo’s sister. December 18, 1930, defendants John and Lizzie Hollo were indebted to Louise Mathews and Myrtle Hollo, their daughters, for over $20,000, and by the deed here in…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Malchow v. MalchowSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
- Seitz v. Union Brass & Metal Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
- Smith v. Benefit Assn. of Railway EmployeesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
- Sheffield v. CliffordSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
- Buro v. MorseSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Roberge v. Cambridge Cooperative Creamery Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1956
- Kiebach v. KiebachSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1948