Legal Opinion
Osterberg v. Section 30 Development Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided November 7, 1924No. 24,196PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWilson, C. J.
Plaintiffs were given a.verdict for $13,121.68. From an order denying motion for new trial defendant has appealed.
In 1911 Mr. K. A. McDonald, the secretary of defendant company, became the lessee of certain ore lands on the Oayuna Range owned in fee by one Hopkins. McDonald conveyed to the plaintiffs a one-fourth interest in and to this lease. He conveyed the other three-fourths interest to defendant. An agreement was made between plaintiffs and defendant under which plaintiffs were to drill this land, they assuming and paying one-fourth of the cost, and billing the defendant for…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Thompson v. LibbySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
- Wheaton Roller-Mill Co. v. John T. Noye Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
- Samuel H. Chute Co. v. LattaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- Cargill Commission Co. v. SwartwoodSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
- Potter v. EastonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1901
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Geer v. BirminghamDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1950
- Taylor v. MoreSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
- Bjornstad v. Northern States Power Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
- Spielman v. AlbinsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
- Schenstrom v. Continental Machines, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1949
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.