Lundberg v. Single Men's Endowment Ass'n
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Hennepin county, under Gen. St. 1878, c. 76, against the defendant, which, it is alleged “is and for more than three years last past has been a cle facto domestic corporation, claiming to be duly incorporated under the laws of this state, and acting and contracting as such corporation under the name” by which it is impleaded.
Read the full summary
Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Hennepin county, under Gen. St. 1878, c. 76, against the defendant, which, it is alleged “is and for more than three years last past has been a cle facto domestic corporation, claiming to be duly incorporated under the laws of this state, and acting and contracting as such corporation under the name” by which it is impleaded. The complaint alleges the recovery of a judgment for $1,177 by plaintiff against defendant on October 1, 1887, and execution returned unsatisfied on December 29, 1887, and that the judgment is wholly unpaid, and the…
1Opinion of the CourtGileillan, C. J.
The appellant claims there should be a reversal for two reasons: First, because a prior appeal with a stay-bond stayed proceedings in the action at the time the judgment in this appeal was entered; second, because the findings of the court and direction for judgment did not authorize the clerk to enter judgment naming a receiver, no receiver being named in the findings or direction for judgment. Assuming the facts to be as assumed by the appellant, there is no matter of error such as this court reviews in those points. If the clerk entered judgment when proceedings were stayed, or if, in…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Kenning v. ReichelSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1921
- State ex rel. Norris v. District Court First Judicial DistrictSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Scott v. Minneapolis, St. Paul, & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Goldman v. ChristySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924