Legal Opinion

Hamilton v. Hulett

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided October 31, 1892PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal by defendant, M. T. Hulett, from an order of the District Court of St. Louis County, Start, J., made April 14, 1892, refusing a new trial.

Read the full summary

Appeal by defendant, M. T. Hulett, from an order of the District Court of St. Louis County, Start, J., made April 14, 1892, refusing a new trial. This action was brought by the plaintiff, Hannah Hamilton, against the defendant M. T. Hulett, in November, 1891. The complaint alleges, that on or about March 16, 1891, plaintiff sold to defendant an undivided one-half interest in the southeast quarter of section twelve, (12,) Township fifty-one, (51,) Range thirteen, (13,) in St. Louis County; that defendant agreed to pay therefor the sum of $1,700; that he has paid only $1,480.99. The complaint…

1Opinion of the CourtDickinson, J.

The cause of action set forth in the complaint is that in March, 1891, the plaintiff sold to the defendant an undivided one-half interest in a specified tract of land, for which the defendant promised to pay the sum of $1,700, of which only $1,480.99 has .been *211paid; that in May of the same year the plaintiff sold to the defendant the other undivided one-half interest in the same lands, for which the latter promised to pay the sum of $1,600, of which only $666.66 has been paid; and that the plaintiff has caused a conveyance of the whole to be made to the defendant. A recovery of the balance of…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. McCue v. SmithSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1864

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. FosterNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1905
  2. Trudeau v. GermannSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907

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

Powered by the Exa API