Legal Opinion
Finkelstein v. Henslin
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided June 16, 1922No. 22,969PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDibell, J.
Action to recover damages for the failure to deliver hay sold by the defendants to the plaintiff. There was a verdict for the defem dants. The court granted plaintiff’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict in the sum of $425, and interest. The defendants appeal.
On August 31, 1917, the plaintiff and the defendants signed the following memorandum:
“Aug. 31, 1917. We hereby sold our upland hay at the rate of $14.00 per ton, to be laid on Raymond Station track between the 10th and 30th of Sept., 1917. Amount of hay consists of between 100 and 125 ton. We hereby receive as a deposit of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- National Cash Register Co. v. MerriganSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1921
- Alfred Shrimpton & Sons v. PhilbrickSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Providence Jewelry Co. v. CroweSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911
- Providence Jewelry Co. v. CroweSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1909
3Cited by5 opinions
- Fiorito v. Clyde Equipment Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1924
- Ford Motor Co. v. PearsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1930
- C. Gotzian & Co. v. TruszinskiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Voss v. ScottSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1930
- Federal Surety Co. v. Midwest Construction Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1929