Baker v. Terrell
Supreme Court of Minnesota
error to the district Court of ramsby county. By the Court — Atwater, J. — The Defendant in Error in this case moves to dismiss the writ, on the ground that no notice was given to the Defendant, within ten days after the issuing of the writ, that the same had been sued out, as required by rule 33, found on p. 7, vol. 2, Minn. Rep.
Read the full summary
error to the district Court of ramsby county. By the Court — Atwater, J. — The Defendant in Error in this case moves to dismiss the writ, on the ground that no notice was given to the Defendant, within ten days after the issuing of the writ, that the same had been sued out, as required by rule 33, found on p. 7, vol. 2, Minn. Rep. Under this rule we hold that a party is entitled to a dismissal of the writ, where the Plaintiff in Error has not complied with its provisions, unless he shall be able to offer a satisfactory excuse therefor, or show facts, which, in the judgment of the Court should…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Cowrt
Emmett, C. J.
There can be but little ' doubt that the chapter of our statutes concerning uses and *198trusts (Comp. Stat., chap. 82), relates to real property only. Consequently, that section which abolishes the trust previously implied in favor of a person who pays the consideration for a grant made to another, does, not necessarily apply to transactions concerning personal property. The trust against which the section referred to is directed, results from a presumption the most reasonable, and has been recognized and enforced by innumerable decisions in equity. We do not question…
2Cited by17 opinions
- Harris v. MastersonTexas Supreme Court · 1897
- McNally v. WeldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
- Pratt v. BuckleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- Parsons v. UrieCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1906
- Blumenthal v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1935
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.