Legal Opinion

Huntsman v. Hendricks

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided November 1, 1890PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Eamsey county, Kelly, J., presiding, refusing a new trial after trial by the court, and judgment of $100 ordered for plaintiff, the amount claimed in the complaint being $1,000.

1Opinion of the CourtGilfillan, C. J.

Action on the covenants contained in a deed conveying lots in block 6 of Hitchcock’s addition to West St. Paul, brought by the grantee against the grantor, the former claiming that the latter had at the date of the deed no title to a portion of the lots. In the court below, apparently by consent of parties, the question of plaintiff’s right to recover at all was tried and determined by. the court without a jury, leaving, the question of the amount of damages to be determined upon another or -further trial. Having determined that plaintiff was entitled to recover, the question of the amount of…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Smith v. . City of RochesterNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
  2. Boorman v. SunnuchsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1877
  3. Clute v. FisherMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
  4. Ridgway v. LudlowIndiana Supreme Court · 1877
  5. Kimball v. BryantSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1879

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Lamprey v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
  2. Staley v. Theo. Hamm Brewing Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
  3. Hovelsrud v. HovelsrudSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API