Bishop Iron Co. v. Hyde
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action of ejectment in the district court for St. Louis county against Thomas W. Hyde. After the service of the answer, which included an equitable counterclaim, upon motion of defendant, an order was made making certain persons parties defendant, and requiring them to answer the counterclaim, which order, upon motion of four of said additional parties, was subsequently, by order of Moer, J., vacated as to them.
Read the full summary
Action of ejectment in the district court for St. Louis county against Thomas W. Hyde. After the service of the answer, which included an equitable counterclaim, upon motion of defendant, an order was made making certain persons parties defendant, and requiring them to answer the counterclaim, which order, upon motion of four of said additional parties, was subsequently, by order of Moer, J., vacated as to them. From this order, and also from another order by the same judge, sustaining demurrers of plaintiff and of certain defendants to the counterclaim set forth in the amended answer of…
1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.
This was an action of ejectment, plaintiff corporation alleging that it was the owner of 13Ab of the 40 acres in con*25iroversy, and lessee from the owners in fee of the remaining 12/25, and therefore entitled to the sole and exclusive possession of the entire tract.
The answer admitted that defendant was in possession of the tract, and generally denied all other allegations of the complaint. It then set forth an equitable counterclaim, at great length and with much detail, from which it appears that in 1894 a patent had been issued for said land to one Warren by the general government, and that…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Vance v. BurbankSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
3Cited by4 opinions
- O'Connor v. GertgensSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
- Bishop Iron Co. v. HydeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
- Lamson v. CoffinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
- Midway Co. v. EatonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900