Henry v. Hutchins
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Two actions in the district court for Kittson county, one to recover $6,912 for the conversion of grain, and the other in ejectment to recover possession of the land on which the grain was raised. The cases were tried separately before Grindeland, J. In the first ease a jury returned a verdict in favor of defendant William W. Hutchins, and in the second the court directed a verdict in ‘favor of Hutchins at the close of the testimony.
Read the full summary
Two actions in the district court for Kittson county, one to recover $6,912 for the conversion of grain, and the other in ejectment to recover possession of the land on which the grain was raised. The cases were tried separately before Grindeland, J. In the first ease a jury returned a verdict in favor of defendant William W. Hutchins, and in the second the court directed a verdict in ‘favor of Hutchins at the close of the testimony. From orders denying his motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for new trials, plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, C. J.
These two actions involve substantially the same questions, and, though) tried separately in the court below, were submitted together in this court. The first entitled action is one in conversion for the value of certain grain products, claimed to be the property of plaintiff; while the second action is in ejectment to recover the possession of the land on which the crops alleged to have been converted were raised. The question of the ownership and the right of possession of the land is the controlling issue in each action. In the first the issue was submitted to a jury and a verdict returned…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Lindley v. GroffSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Gracz v. AndersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
- Stone v. HarmonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
- Noyes v. BrownSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
- J. I. Case Threshing Machine Co. v. BarnesCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1909
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Clark v. DyeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
- Bankr. L. Rep. P 71,864, 4 Ucc rep.serv.2d 5 in Re Paul v. Rolain, Debtor. Norwest Bank St. Paul, N.A. v. Edward W. Bergquist, Trustee of the Estate of Paul v. RolainCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1987
- Barney v. Rigby Loan & Investment Co.District Court, D. Idaho · 1972
- Merchants & Farmers State Bank v. OlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1933
- Ohio Confection Co. v. Eimon Mercantile Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.