Sons v. Sons
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in tbe district court for Carver county to recover plaintiffs’ just proportion of bay, grain and other products raised by defendant on a certain farm. Defendant’s demurrer to the complaint was sus-iained by Tifft, J. From the order sustaining the demurrer, plaintiffs appealed.
1Opinion of the Court
Lees, C.
Another phase of Sons v. Sons, 145 Minn. 367, 177 N. W. 498, and supra, page 334, 186 N. W. 309, is presented here. The judgment affirmed on the first appeal determined that the plaintiffs and the defendant owned the farm in litigation as tenants in common, plaintiffs each owning an undivided one-fourth and defendant an undivided one-half thereof; that for six years following March 1, 1913, defendant had exclusive possession of the farm and received the profits derived from it; and that he and the plaintiffs were copartners in the farming enterprise and entitled to share in the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hause v. HauseSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1882
- Kean v. ConnellySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1878
- Sons v. SonsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
- Ford Motor Co. v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
- Nash v. SullivanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Clarke v. BoysenCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1930
- Petraborg v. ZontelliSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
- Hoverson v. HoversonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
- Arnold v. De BooySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
- Kirsch v. Scandia American BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.