Legal Opinion

Clark v. Corser

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided February 9, 1923No. 23,246PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtI-Iallam, J.

On November 1, 1921, defendants Cochran and Merrill were doing business as the La Fayette-St. Paul Company. Plaintiff was in *509their employ as automobile salesman. On that day Cochran, acting for the company, gave to plaintiff an instrument purporting to be a bill of sale of a La Fayette touring ear for the sum of $4,000, which the instrument recited had been paid in full. In fact plaintiff had paid only $2,000, and the bill of sale was given to facilitate a sale of the car by him to a prospective purchaser. As part of the transaction, the car was delivered to plantiff. The prospective sale was…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Joyce v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
  2. Kellogg v. TompsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1886
  3. Moors v. WymanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
  4. Hickok v. . CowperthwaitNew York Court of Appeals · 1913
  5. State ex rel. City of Duluth v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1906

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Morley Construction Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
  2. Live Stock State Bank v. DoyleCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1923
  3. Holmes v. AndersonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1924
  4. Dusenbery v. HawksCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2017
  5. Goembel v. HeeschSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1942

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API