Legal Opinion
Lowe v. Nixon
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided March 4, 1927No. 25,845PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDibell, J.
Action on one of a series of promissory notes. The defendants appeal from an order denying tbeir motion to strike out certain portions of tbe plaintiff’s reply as immaterial, irrelevant and redundant, granting tbe motion of tbe plaintiff to strike out certain portions of tbeir answer as sbam and frivolous, and granting tbe plaintiff’s motion for judgment on tbe pleadings.
Tbe order denying tbe defendants’ motion to strike out portions of tbe plaintiff’s reply as immaterial, irrelevant and redundant is not appealable. See Vermilye v. Vermilye, 32 Minn. 499, 18 N. W. 832, 21 N. W. 736; Exley v.…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Yapp v. ChaseSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
- Knoblauch v. FoglesongSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Crispo v. ConboySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
- Exley v. BerryhillSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
- Lovering v. Webb Publishing Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1909
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Great Northern Oil Co. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1971
- Ginsberg v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1965
- Ferguson v. JensenNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1949
- Kokesh v. City of HopkinsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
- LaDuke v. E. W. Wylie Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1950
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.