Hawke v. Banning
Supreme Court of Minnesota
This was a Writ of Error to the District Court of Ramsey County. The opinion states the facts. The following are the points and authorities relied upon by the counsel for Plaintiff in Error: First. — By the Organic Act, it is declared that a Writ of Error may issue on all final decisions of the District Court, under such regulations as the Legislature may provide. Orgamlc Act, Sec. 9. The Bev.
Read the full summary
This was a Writ of Error to the District Court of Ramsey County. The opinion states the facts. The following are the points and authorities relied upon by the counsel for Plaintiff in Error: First. — By the Organic Act, it is declared that a Writ of Error may issue on all final decisions of the District Court, under such regulations as the Legislature may provide. Orgamlc Act, Sec. 9. The Bev. St. provides that the Supreme Court may issue Writs of Error, &c., to all Courts of inferior jurisdiction. B. S. p. 285-6, sec. 4, 5 ; and also, that Writs of Error may issue of course, out of the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court
— Flandrau, J.
This action was brought to foreclose a mortgage. The complaint shows that the Defend*70ant, Hawke, executed and delivered to tbe Plaintiff, Banning, a bond and mortgage on the Winslow House, in St. Paul, to secure tbe payment of fifteen thousand dollars; then alleges default in tbe payment, and contains tbe following allegation, to show tbe interest of tbe Plaintiff, Bucknell, to wit: “ And tbe said William L. Banning bolds tbe said mortgage and obligation in bis name for tbe joint use and benefit of tbe said Plaintiffs.” Judgment was allowed to- go against tbe…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Millette v. MehmkeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1879