Hunt v. Meeker County Abstract & Loan Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Meeker county for the cancelation of a lease and a sale of the premises. The case was tried before Qvale, J., who made findings and dismissed the action. From the judgment entered pursuant to the order for judgment, plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the Court
Taylor, C.
On March 30, 1885, E. P. & H. I. Peterson, then owners of lot 26 of block 59 in the village of Litchfield, of the first part, and H. S. Branham, of the second part, entered into a written agreement “for the purpose of jointly erecting” a two-story brick building on said lot, “the first story thereof to be used by the said H. S. Branham for a banking, abstract and real estate office, and the second 'story thereof to be used by the parties of the first part for a printing office and law office or other suitable office for business.” The agreement provided that the Petersons should…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hill v. RenoIllinois Supreme Court · 1883
- Dee v. DeeIllinois Supreme Court · 1904
- Martin v. MartinIllinois Supreme Court · 1897
- Baldwin v. . HumphreyNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Haeussler v. Missouri Iron Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1892
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Hershman-Tcherepnin v. TcherepninMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2008
- Hunt v. Meeker County Abstract & Loan Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
- Thompson v. BrunsonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1984
- Braaten v. BraatenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1979
- Thomas v. WitteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.