Boice v. Boice
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Replevin for two mares, taken from plaintiff’s possession by defendant as mortgagee in a chattel mortgage. A jury was waived, and the cause set for trial by Farmer, J., on June 4, 1880, the fourth day of the term of the district court for Fillmore county. On that day the cause was not reached, (the court being engaged in trying another action,) but was brought on for trial on the following day.
Read the full summary
Replevin for two mares, taken from plaintiff’s possession by defendant as mortgagee in a chattel mortgage. A jury was waived, and the cause set for trial by Farmer, J., on June 4, 1880, the fourth day of the term of the district court for Fillmore county. On that day the cause was not reached, (the court being engaged in trying another action,) but was brought on for trial on the following day. On that day the attorney of record for plaintiff was not present, and, without making affidavit for a postponement of the trial, plaintiff employed other counsel, and the cause was tried and submitted.…
1Opinion of the CourtBerry, J.
The plaintiff’s application for a postponement of the trial of this action was addressed to the discretion of the district court. So far as the motion for a new trial was based upon the refusal to grant this application, and the alleged consequences of the same, we think, without entering into details, that the district judge assigns very satisfactory reasons why a new trial should not be granted. As to the merits, the court was amply justified by the evidence, especially by the testimony of Mr. Colburn, in finding that the so-called land agreement was merely an additional security for the…
2Cited by5 opinions
- International Building & Loan Ass'n v. HardyTexas Supreme Court · 1894
- Birkhofer v. KrummCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
- Davis v. RupeIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
- Werner v. BergmanSupreme Court of Kansas · 1882
- Kellogg v. AndersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889