Legal Opinion · Dissent

Pattridge v. Palmer

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 17, 1937No. 31,153PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Dissent

1. The rule of Luce v. Clarke, 49 Minn. 356, 51 N.W. 1162, reiterated in cases which follow it, is predicated upon a fundamental error that a cause of action arises, under the statute (§ 9201), only at the place of a debtor's domicile. The overwhelming weight of authority is to the effect that a cause of action consists of a primary right in the plaintiff, a corresponding duty in the defendant, and a breach by the defendant. Of these essentials of a cause of action, Pomeroy says, at page 528, § 347, Code Remedies (5 ed.):

"Every action, however complicated or however simple, must contain these…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Patterson v. . PattersonNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
  2. McKee v. DoddCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Bruner v. MartinSupreme Court of Kansas · 1907
  4. State v. GutSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1868
  5. King v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1900

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Pattridge v. PalmerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1937

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API