Legal Opinion
Mattson v. Cuyuna Ore Co.
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided October 22, 1959No. 5-59 Civ. 32PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DONOVAN, District Judge.
The above-entitled matter came on for hearing before the Court at a Special Term at Duluth, Minnesota, on September 4, 1959, on two motions. Each party sought relief as follows: (1) Defendant moved to dismiss the action for failure to join indispensable parties, and (2) plaintiffs moved for leave to file an amended complaint.
Plaintiff lessors are suing the defendant lessee for damages, alleging fraud, misrepresentation and breach of contract in connection with certain lease agreements. Defendant’s supporting affidavit establishes that certain parties who have an…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- New York Central & Hudson River Railroad v. KinneySupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- American Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. All American Bus Lines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1951
- Harold L. Warner v. First National Bank of MinneapolisCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1956
- Harry E. Kern v. Standard Oil CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1956
- Kansas Electric Power Co. Of Leavenworth, Kan. v. JanisCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1952
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Crowe v. HouseworthCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1974
- Bottum v. HerrSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1968
- Bates v. Western ElectricDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1976
- Mattson v. Cuyuna Ore CompanyDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1960
- Thrasher v. Missouri State Highway CommissionDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1981
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.