Douglas v. Leighton
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiff, Carl H. Douglas, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Henry G. Hicks, J., made December 10, 1892, denying his motion for a new trial. Action to recover of Nathaniel G-. Leighton and others, partners, a balance of $1,531.57 for saw logs sold and delivered.
Read the full summary
Appeal by plaintiff, Carl H. Douglas, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Henry G. Hicks, J., made December 10, 1892, denying his motion for a new trial. Action to recover of Nathaniel G-. Leighton and others, partners, a balance of $1,531.57 for saw logs sold and delivered. On February 19, 1880, plaintiff contracted with defendants to cut and bank about 2,000,000 feet of white pine saw logs during that winter on the Little Prairie River in Carlton County. They were to be there scaled by the Surveyor General. This scaling was to be taken and accepted by the parties as the…
1Opinion of the CourtDickinson, J.
This is an action to recover the purchase price of a quantity of saw logs sold by the plaintiff to the defendants. The controversy is as to the quantity of the logs sold and delivered, and whether the quantity, as claimed by the plaintiff, has been deter*179mined in the manner contemplated by the contract of sale. The contract was in writing. The defendants were to pay a stated price per 1,000 feet. The contract provided that the logs were “to be cut, banked, and scaled during the present winter by said Douglas (plaintiff) on the Little Prairie river, in Carlton county, Minnesota. * * * Said…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Beseman v. WeberSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Pratt v. DuceySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
3Cited by3 opinions
- Cussler v. Firemen's Insurance Co. of NewarkSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
- Beseman v. WeberSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Douglas v. LeightonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894