Prendergast v. Searle
Supreme Court of Minnesota
From an order of the municipal court of St. Paul, Twohy, J., denying a new trial, after findings and order for judgment in favor of plaintiff for $100, defendant appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.
The defendant, as a tenant, used and occupied plaintiff’s premises for 33 months, removing from the same June 30, 1897, and paying as rent the sum of $50 in advance for each and every month.
This was an action brought to recover rent for the months of July and August, 1897. The principal controversy at the trial was whether or not defendant entered into possession by virtue of a written lease, in which the term was fixed at 20 months, commenc*334ing September 1, 1894, with rent stipulated as above stated. The plaintiff claimed there was such a lease, which was left in defendant’s possession, while…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Finch v. MooreSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
- Sanford v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1877
- Fall v. MooreSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
3Cited by7 opinions
- Prendergast v. SearleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
- Sutherland v. DroletWisconsin Supreme Court · 1913
- Buckingham Apartment House Co. v. DafoeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
- In Re FoleyDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 1951
- Maze v. Minneapolis Willys-Knight Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.