N. E. Tyson & Co. v. Charles J. Kane & Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
This was an appeal from tbe District Court of Ramsey County, and tbe record is accompanied by an agreed case, giving the proceedings of tbe trial and evidence offered in the Court below. Tbe main points in controversy upon tbe appeal arise upon objections to the admissibility of depositions, offered upon tbe trial, which objections are stated in tbe opinion of tbe Court.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal from tbe District Court of Ramsey County, and tbe record is accompanied by an agreed case, giving the proceedings of tbe trial and evidence offered in the Court below. Tbe main points in controversy upon tbe appeal arise upon objections to the admissibility of depositions, offered upon tbe trial, which objections are stated in tbe opinion of tbe Court. Tbe following are tbe points and authorities relied on by Counsel for tbe Plaintiffs in Error: Fi/rst. — The Court below erred in receiving tbe testimony of tbe Plaintiffs in tbe action, offered under a commission. Tbe…
1Opinion of the Court
*290 By the Cowt
— Flakdrau, J.
— A stipulation was entered into by the Attorneys for the respective parties to this action by which a commission was allowed to issue without the “affidavits and notices required by Statute and rules of Court ” being made and given, to take the depositions of Charles J. Kane and Henry P. Hubbell, the parties Plaintiff, and other witnesses on the part of the Plaintiff. The stipulation waives cross interrogatories on the part of the Defendants, but reserves the “ right to object to the admissibility of the interrogatories and the testimony elicited thereby in like…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Cooper v. StinsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1861