Hunsden v. Churchill
Supreme Court of Minnesota
This action was brought April 4, 1871, in the district court for Dodge county, to recover for services rendered and money paid to defendant’s use.
Read the full summary
This action was brought April 4, 1871, in the district court for Dodge county, to recover for services rendered and money paid to defendant’s use. The defendant answered, denying the allegations of the complaint and alleging a counter olaim, to which the plaintiff replied, issue' being joined August 1, 1871. The cause was noticed for trial and placed on the calendar at the general term held in September, 1871, and at that time was continued, on the defendant’s application, to the next general term, held March 4, 1872. At that term the defendant and his attorney were present, and by consent…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Berry, J.
The modes in which an action may be dismissed in the district courts of this state, are prescribed by sec. 242, chap. 66, Gen. Stat., by which, also, “ all other modes of dismissing an action, by non-suit or otherwise, are abolished.” A discontinuance being but a species of dismissal, (in the eye of the statute,) it follows that a mere submission to arbitration, though followed by an award, is not here a discontinuance of an action, since it is not one of the prescribed modes of dismissal.
*411We are referred to several adjudged cases in which a different rule is laid down;…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Trojan Drilling Co. v. MorrisonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1921