Moquist v. Chapel
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiffs from an order of the district court for Ram•■■sey county, Otis, J., denying a motion for a new trial.
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
The complaint alleged that, on a day named, ’the plaintiffs, as co-partners, were the owners of and in possession *259of certain chattel property, and that on that day the defendant wrongfully converted the property to his own use. The answer alleged that, on the day named in the complaint, the defendant, as sheriff, under and by virtue of a writ of attachment against one of the plaintiffs, levied on the property, and took it into his custody, and that he still held the property by virtue of such levy. When the case came on for trial, “the attachment papers” were put in evidence, and plaintiffs…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Herbert v. WaggSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- Minn. State Bd. of Health v. City of BrainerdSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
- Olson v. ShephardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Baker v. KaiserCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1903
- Lindquist v. GibbsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.