C. N. Nelson Lumber Co. v. Pelan
Supreme Court of Minnesota
The plaintiff, (a corporation,) having recovered judgment in the district court for Kittson county against the defendants, duly garnished Charles H. Pelan, whose disclosure was taken.
Read the full summary
The plaintiff, (a corporation,) having recovered judgment in the district court for Kittson county against the defendants, duly garnished Charles H. Pelan, whose disclosure was taken. Thereupon the plaintiff, upon leave granted by the court, filed and served a supplemental complaint against the defendants and the garnishee, setting out the rendition of the judgment in the main action,'the garnishment proceedings, and the disclosure, (from which it appeared that the garnishee had in his possession money, property and effects received from the defendants under an alleged deed of assignment,)…
1Opinion of the CourtDicKinson, J.
The court below overruled the demurrer to the answer for the reason that it contained no allegations of new matter, but consisted only of a denial of a portion of the complaint. This decision we affirm. The statute only authorizes a demurrer to “an answer containing new matter, when upon its face it does not constitute a counterclaim or defence.” Gen. St. 1878, c. 66, § 100; Lund v. Seaman’s Savings Bank, 23 How. Pr. 258; Ketcham v. Zerega, 1 E. D. Smith, 553; Rice v. O’Connor, 10 Abb. Pr. 362; Oleson v. Hendrickson, 12 Iowa, 222. The appellant refers, in support of its right to demur, to a…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- O'Ferrall v. ColbySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1858
- Lund v. Seamen's Bank for SavingsNew York Supreme Court · 1862
- Oleson v. HendricksonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1861
- Rice v. O'ConnorNew York Supreme Court · 1860
3Cited by2 opinions
- Andrews v. School-District No. 4Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
- Alansky v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1947