Pott v. Hanson
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action by Klaas Goeman Pott and Heika 0. Goeman Pott against H. J. Hanson, Magdalena Hanson, Charles V. Holmstrom and J. S. Pomeroy in the- district court for Renville county to rescind an exchange of land in Kandiyohi, county for capital stock in the Universal Art Company, and to decree that plaintiffs axe the owners of the real estate described in the complaint, and for $3,000, the value of the real property conveyed by H. J. Hanson to A. H. Rosenquist.
Read the full summary
Action by Klaas Goeman Pott and Heika 0. Goeman Pott against H. J. Hanson, Magdalena Hanson, Charles V. Holmstrom and J. S. Pomeroy in the- district court for Renville county to rescind an exchange of land in Kandiyohi, county for capital stock in the Universal Art Company, and to decree that plaintiffs axe the owners of the real estate described in the complaint, and for $3,000, the value of the real property conveyed by H. J. Hanson to A. H. Rosenquist. The case was tried before Powers, J., who made findings, as mentioned in the opinion, and as conclusions of law dismissed the action as to…
1Opinion of the Court
BKOWN, j.
• The facts in this case, as disclosed by the findings of the trial *418court, are as follows: On the date of the transaction involved in this action, plaintiffs, husband and wife, were the owners of and in possession of certain real property situated in Kandiyohi county, consisting of farm land and village lots, of the value of about $15,000, over and above incumbrances. Defendant H. J. Hanson was the owner of one hundred sixty shares of the stock of the Universal Art Company, a corporation organized under the laws of the state, and engaged in manufacturing pictures, picture frames,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Busterud v. FarringtonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Newton v. NewtonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
- Humphrey v. MerriamSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
- Craig v. CookSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1881
- Bank of Woodland v. HiattCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Hemming v. Ald, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1967
- Muskogee Vitrified Brick Co. v. NapierSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Proulx v. Hirsch Bros. Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1968
- Tempero v. AdamsNebraska Supreme Court · 1950
- Schaeffer v. RushSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1912
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.