Legal Opinion

Magee v. Odden

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided October 19, 1945No. 34,047PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Julius J. Olson, Justice.

Defendant Jameson appeals from a judgment and also from an order denying an alternative motion made by both defendants to amend the original findings or for a new trial. Insofar as the order denies amendments to the findings, it is of course not ap-pealable.

The action was brought against both defendants and is founded upon fraud and deceit claimed to have been practiced directly and personally by Jameson in the sale of plaintiffs’ property. Liability as to defendant Odden was predicated upon the theory that Jameson was acting for him in making this deal. The facts are…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Doyen v. BauerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
  2. Tilleny v. WolvertonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
  3. Proper v. ProperSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
  4. American Security & Investment Co. v. PenneySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
  5. Bloomingdale v. HodgesAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1897

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Boulevard Plaza Corp. v. CampbellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1959
  2. Kratzer v. Welsh Companies, LLCSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2009
  3. In Re Estate of WilsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1947
  4. Prince v. SonnesynSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1946
  5. Tarnowski v. ResopSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1952

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

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

Powered by the Exa API