Hicks v. Stone
Supreme Court of Minnesota
These actions were brought in the District Court for Nicollet county to recover the value of a stock of goods,-alleged to be the property of the plaintiff and wrongfully taken and detained by defendants.
Read the full summary
These actions were brought in the District Court for Nicollet county to recover the value of a stock of goods,-alleged to be the property of the plaintiff and wrongfully taken and detained by defendants. The defendants justify the taking, alleging that at the time the goods were the property of La Dow & Isaacs, a firm composed of William C. La Dow and Samuel T. Isaacs, and that it was taken by the defendant Stone, then sheriff of said county, under and by virtue of certain writs of attachment issued against the property of said firm in certain suits in said Court, commenced against them by…
1Opinion of the Court
Berry, J.-
By the Court -By stipulation the above entitled actions were tried below together. They were argued together'in this Court, and present the same questions for our determination. The jury having brought in a general verdict for the defendants, the plaintiff moved for a new trial for the reasons “ (1) that the verdicts are not justified by evidence; (2) that the verdicts are contrary to law; (3) that there were errors in law occurring at the trial and excepted to by plaintiff.” The motion was granted, and it would appear from the opinion of the learned Judge below, which comes up here…
2Cited by35 opinions
- Cobb v. MaloneSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890
- Martin v. ParkinsNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1927
- Ohio & Mississippi Railway Co. v. SteinIndiana Supreme Court · 1892
- Lamoreaux v. AnderschSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
- Loomis v. PerkinsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1898
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.