Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Schmidt v. Youngquist

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided November 15, 1929No. 27,639PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilson, C. J.

Mandamus to compel the attorney general of the state to place two pending civil actions, wherein the state is plaintiff, upon the next general term calendar of the district court in the county wherein they are pending, and to try said causes at said next term of court.

In response to the alternative writ to show cause the respondent appeared and moved the court to quash the writ and dismiss the proceeding on the ground that the facts stated in the writ did not constitute a cause of action. The motion was denied, and respondent was directed to answer the writ, which he did.

Both parties moved…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Young v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
  2. People ex rel. Raster v. HealyIllinois Supreme Court · 1907
  3. Wright v. BellTexas Supreme Court · 1901
  4. Lewright v. BellTexas Supreme Court · 1901
  5. State ex rel. Rosbach v. PrattWashington Supreme Court · 1912

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Birkeland v. ChristiansonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1930
  2. Yess v. FerchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
  3. State Ex Rel. Goar v. HoffmannSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
  4. State Ex Rel. Peterson v. District CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
  5. City of Wyoming v. Minnesota Office of Administrative HearingsCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API