West Publishing Co. v. De La Mott
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Defendant having on February 4, 1907, perfected his appeal from-an order of the district court for St. Louis county, Ensign, J., ordering him to appear before a referee named for an examination concerning his property, and having failed for more than sixty days to make- and file a return with the clerk of this court, plaintiff moved for am order dismissing the appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtStart, C. J.
Appeal from an ex parte order made by a judge of the district court of the county of St. Louis directing the defendant to appear for examination concerning his property.- This is a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the order is not appealable, and, further, that, although more than sixty days have elapsed since the appeal was perfected, no return has been made to this court as required by rule-4 of the court.
The defendant admits that the return has not been made, and that the time limited by the rule for so doing has expired, but urges that no notice to make the return, as…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State ex rel. Norris v. District Court First Judicial DistrictSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Masterson v. Le ClaireSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1860
- Sundberg v. GoarSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1904
- Fuller v. SchutzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
- Plymouth Clothing House v. SeymourSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Security State Bank v. BrechtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1921
- State v. J. P. Sinna & Sons, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1965