Legal Opinion · Dissent

Olin v. Fox

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided May 16, 1900No. Nos. 12,049-(72)Published

Action in the district court for Wilkin county to recover $50.50, and interest, damages for the wrongful seizure under attachment of 112 bushels of oats and 75 bushels of barley. The case was tried before Watts, J., and a jury, which rendered a verdict in favor of plaintiff for $56. From an order granting defendant’s motion for a new trial unless plaintiff consent to a reduction of the verdict to $29, plaintiff appealed.

1DissentLewis, J.

It is true that exemption laws should be contrued liberally, so as to carry out the legislative intent. Such statutes are founded upon the benevolent purpose of guarding debtors from want, who have suffered from misfortune or improvidence. And if a strict and literal reading of such a statute leads to a conclusion out of harmony with its spirit, sufficient latitude should be granted to still preserve its' purpose. The exemption laws of this state in reference to personal property (G. S. 1894, § 5459) are based upon a logical system. First, there is a class of exemptions, found in the first…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. King v. MooreMichigan Supreme Court · 1862
  2. Cowan v. MainWisconsin Supreme Court · 1869
  3. Foss v. StewartSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1837

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

Powered by the Exa API