Legal Opinion
Leifman v. Percansky
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided July 1, 1932No. 29,042PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtOlsen, J.
Defendant appeals from the judgment.
Plaintiffs brought suit in the municipal court in the city of Minneapolis under the forcible entry and unlawful detainer statute.
Defendant was in possession of the property under a written lease with plaintiff Leif man. The other plaintiffs have some interest in the lease or the rents. Defendant was in default in the payment of two months’ rent, amounting to $600, and the action was brought to evict him for nonpayment of such rent under the terms of the lease. The trial court found for the plaintiffs and ordered restitution of the premises. Judgment was so…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Keating v. SpringerIllinois Supreme Court · 1893
- William Weisman Holding Co. v. MillerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
- Peterson v. KreugerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
- Roach v. PetersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
- Seigel v. NearyAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1902
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Brown v. St. Paul City Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
- Fritz v. WarthenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1973
- University Community Properties, Inc. v. NortonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
- Strupp v. CanniffSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1967
- State v. BrownSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1938
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.