Legal Opinion

Wright v. Tileston

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 17, 1895No. 8997PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Otter Tail county, Baxter, J., striking out defendant’s second defense in the amended answer. The nature of the second defense is stated in the opinion. Action by assignee for negligence of lessee of a certain water power, a dam constructed for the purpose of utilizing the same, a mill and appurtenances.

Read the full summary

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Otter Tail county, Baxter, J., striking out defendant’s second defense in the amended answer. The nature of the second defense is stated in the opinion. Action by assignee for negligence of lessee of a certain water power, a dam constructed for the purpose of utilizing the same, a mill and appurtenances. The complaint alleged that the defendant neglected to reduce the volume of water in the reservoir above the dam at a time of high water, whereby a portion of the dam was swept away and the remainder of the dam was weakened.

1Opinion of the Court

BUCK, j.

On March 21, 1894, the plaintiff in his capacity as assignee of the Page Flour Mills, an insolvent corporation, commenced an action against the defendant, Tileston, to recover damages for the breach of one of the covenants of a lease made and entered into between these parties, the cause of action alleged in the complaint being the failure on the part of the defendant to pay the rent due on the lease. The defendant did not serve any answer, and on April 12, 1894, the plaintiff caused judgment to be entered against the defendant for the full amount of the damages claimed in the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Whittaker v. CollinsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Villaume v. WilkinsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
  2. H. W. Wilson Co. v. A. B. Farnham & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
  3. Reed v. BernsteinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
  4. GENERAL MILLS, Inc. v. GOLDMAN (INDIANA LUMBERMENS MUT. INS. CO. OF INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA, Intervener)Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1950
  5. GENERAL MILLS, Inc. v. GOLDMAN (INDIANA LUMBERMENS MUT. INS. CO. OF INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA, Intervener)Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1950

2 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