Legal Opinion

Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. v. Price

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided April 28, 1933No. 29,386Published

1Opinion of the Court

HOLT, Justice.

Plaintiffs appeal from an order vacating a judgment entered on default and permitting defendant to interpose a proposed answer.

Vacating a default judgment is largely discretionary; but if it appears that the proposed answer states no defense, it is an abuse of judicial discretion to vacate the judgment. We therefore go directly to the merits of the proposed answer. The complaint alleged that plaintiffs’ grantors, as lessors, by written lease, let the second floor of a two-story brick building known as No. 25 South Fifth street in Minneapolis, Minnesota, for the term of ten years…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Defiel v. RosenbergSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
  2. O'Neil v. DavidsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
  3. Bell v. BakerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890

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

Powered by the Exa API