Torgerson v. Ohnstad
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Steele county to recover $1,100 upon a promissory note. The amended answer alleged that without defendant’s knowledge or consent plaintiffs released their right to collect the note out of the assets of the Ellendale Mercantile Company.
Read the full summary
Action in the district court for Steele county to recover $1,100 upon a promissory note. The amended answer alleged that without defendant’s knowledge or consent plaintiffs released their right to collect the note out of the assets of the Ellendale Mercantile Company. The case was tried before Childress, J., who when plaintiffs rested denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the action and at the close of the testimony denied his motion for a directed verdict, and a jury which returned a verdict for $1,342. From an order directing judgment in favor of defendant notwithstanding the verdict,…
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, C. J.
Action to recover against defendant as an indorser, of a promissory note. Plaintiffs had a verdict which was set aside and judgment ordered for defendant. Plaintiffs appealed.
It appears that the note in suit was given to defendant for a loan of $1,100 to the makers, who were mercantile dealers in the village of Ellendale, in Steele county, this state. Plaintiffs were engaged in automobile repair work in the same place, as was one Carl Aronson also. Plaintiffs desired to dispose of their business and negotiations with Aron-son resulted in a sale thereof to him. Aronson is the son-in-law of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Rosson v. CarrollTennessee Supreme Court · 1891
3Cited by3 opinions
- G. Sommers & Co. v. Tintah Co-Operative Mercantile Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
- Melvin Gelman v. Public National BankCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1967
- Bredow v. WollSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928