Baumann v. Cunningham
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiff, Edward C. Baumann, from an order of the . district court of St. Louis county, Stearns, J., made September 28, 1891, refusing a new trial. Evar 0. Wohlin, of Duluth, on April 20, 1891, made an assignment to plaintiff under Laws 1881, ch. 148, of all his nonexempt property, in trust to pay those of his creditors who should release the unpaid residue of their claims.
Read the full summary
Appeal by plaintiff, Edward C. Baumann, from an order of the . district court of St. Louis county, Stearns, J., made September 28, 1891, refusing a new trial. Evar 0. Wohlin, of Duluth, on April 20, 1891, made an assignment to plaintiff under Laws 1881, ch. 148, of all his nonexempt property, in trust to pay those of his creditors who should release the unpaid residue of their claims. Plaintiff accepted the trust, and within a few days thereafter brought .this action against William Cunningham, a merchant of St. Paul, to set aside a.mortgage given to him by Wohlin on March 16, 1891. Wohlin…
1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.
The only finding of fact assailed by the assignments of error herein is that whereby the court below found that the insolvent, Wohlin, did not make the notes and mortgage in question with a view of giving a- preference to the defendant, Cunningham, but with a view to being enabled to continue his business, which was that of a merchant tailor, at retail. It therefore stands admitted that on the day of the execution and delivery of the notes and mort*296gage — March 16, 1891 — by Wohlin to defendant, Cunningham, and to whom he was indebted in the sum of $470.74 for goods sold, Wohlin was simply…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Glendenning Motorways, Inc. v. AndersonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1954
- Penney v. HauganSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
- Joseph Schlitz Brewing Co. v. ChildsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
- Fisher v. UtendorferSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1897