Legal Opinion
Schoenborn v. State Bank
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided April 25, 1924No. 23,861PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Lees, C.
Plaintiff brought two actions to recover possession of two notes and mortgages. By consent the actions were consolidated for trial. The jury returned a verdict in plaintiff’s favor. Defendants have appealed from a denial of their motion in the alternative .for judgment or a new trial.
A note and mortgage of $15,000 are involved in the action against the bank alone, and a note and mortgage of $4,500 in the action in *207which Gerhard Braegelmann, its president, is joined as a defendant.
At the time of the transactions in question, plaintiff and her husband resided on a farm near Fresno,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Henry v. HutchinsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
- Roseberry v. Hart-Parr Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
- Schauble v. HeddingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
- Johnson v. OgrenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
- Mitchell v. Minnesota Fire Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Anderson v. First Nat. Bank of Pine CitySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
- Frank Sullivan Company v. Midwest Sheet Metal WorksCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1964
- Robie v. HoldahlSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1930
- CitiMortgage, Inc. a successor by merger to ABN AMRO Mortgage Group, Inc. v. Sandra Lee Akers, William Lee AkersCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2014