Ward v. Allen
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in replevin in the district cciurt for Martin county, or in case possession could not be had for $4,000, the value of the property. The case was tried before Quinn, J\, who at the close of the testimony denied plaintiff’s motion for a directed verdict, and a jury which returned a verdict in favor of defendant and found the value of the property was $1,500. From an order denying his motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial, plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.
Action in replevin. Defendant had a verdict, and plaintiff moved in the alternative for judgment non obstante, or a new trial. The motion was denied and this appeal resulted.
The parties were partners in the practice of law for 5 years. Upon the dissolution of the partnership the defendant gave to plaintiff his promissory note for $750, agreed to pay the firm indebtedness, with one exception, and took over the firm assets, including a,law library and office furniture. About a year thereafter, or in September, 1908, to adjust the amount then due on the $750 note and upon the firm indebtedness,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Bandman v. . FinnNew York Court of Appeals · 1906
- Chicora Fertilizer Co. v. DunanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1900
- Murray v. FoskettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911
- Tucker v. HelgrenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
- Jenson v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
3Cited by6 opinions
- Don Kral Incorporated v. LindstromSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1970
- Burleson v. LangdonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
- Robert M. Larsen v. Einar C. EricksonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1977
- Gage v. G. W. Van Dusen & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
- Thoele v. Lavallee Law Book Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.