Legal Opinion

Malmquist v. McChord

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 13, 1929No. 27,581PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDibell, J.

Action on a promissory note. There was a verdict for the defendant. The plaintiff appeals from the order denying his alternative motion for judgment or a new trial.

The defense to the note was duress. To constitute duress there must be such constraint as substantially takes away free agency. The use of physical force or the threat of personal injury is not essential. Each case depends largely on its own facts. 2 Dunnell, Minn. Dig. (2 ed.) § 2848, and cases cited. A good discussion is found in American Nat. Bank v. Helling, 161 Minn. 504, 202 N. W. 20.

On August 24, 1927, the defendant executed…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. American National Bank v. HellingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Erickson-Hellekson-Vye Co. v. A. Wells Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
  2. O'NEIL v. DuxSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1960
  3. Steblay v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
  4. Bank of Tucson v. AdrianDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1964

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API