Folsom v. Carli
Supreme Court of Minnesota
APPEAL PEOM THE DISTRICT COURT OK WASHINGTON COUNTY. Points apd Antborities of Appellant. I. — It appears from the pleadings and the evidence that the premises described in the answer were sold to the Defendant at Sheriff’s sale, under execution, on the 18th day of May,, 1859, and that from and after the said 18th day of May, 1859, the defendant was entitled to the-possession of said premises, and was entitled to the use, rents, issues and profits thereof; and it also…
Read the full summary
APPEAL PEOM THE DISTRICT COURT OK WASHINGTON COUNTY. Points apd Antborities of Appellant. I. — It appears from the pleadings and the evidence that the premises described in the answer were sold to the Defendant at Sheriff’s sale, under execution, on the 18th day of May,, 1859, and that from and after the said 18th day of May, 1859, the defendant was entitled to the-possession of said premises, and was entitled to the use, rents, issues and profits thereof; and it also appears that from and after the said 18th day of May, 1859, the Plaintiff held the possession of said premises, and had the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court —
Elandeau, J.
— Carli brings suit against Eolsom on a promissory note for $129.52, dated January 22, 1859, payable in seven months after date with interest at one per cent, per month. The answer of Eolsom sets forth that on the 30th day of November, 1857, one Lee recovered a judgment against two McKusicks and the Defendant Eolsom, for $445.35. That prior to the recovery of the judgment, at the time thereof, and up to the 25th day of August, 1858, Noah McKusick, one of the Defendants in the judgment, owned a certain piece of- land in fee. That execution was issued on the judgment…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Smith v. StewartNew York Supreme Court · 1810
- Featherstonhaugh v. BradshawNew York Supreme Court · 1828
- Bancroft v. WardwellNew York Supreme Court · 1816
- Vandenheuvel v. StorrsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1819
- Jones v. TiptonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1834
3Cited by6 opinions
- Peacock Hotel, Inc. v. ShipmanSupreme Court of Florida · 1931
- Sensormatic Security Corporation v. Sensormatic Electronics CorporationDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2006
- Thornley Land & Livestock Co. v. GaileyUtah Supreme Court · 1943
- Hennessey v. HoagSupreme Court of Colorado · 1891
- Robison v. RobisonUtah Supreme Court · 1921
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.