Manson v. Village of Chisholm
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in tbe district court for St. Louis county to recover $1,000 for change of grade of a street. Defendant demurred to the complaint on the ground that it did not set forth facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The demurrer wa's overruled and the .case certified to the supreme court, Hughes, J.
1Opinion of the CourtHallam, J.
Plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for the change of grade of a street. Defendant demurred, alleging as a ground that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to- constitute a cause of action. The trial court overruled the demurrer and certified the case to this court. The sole ground relied on by defendant in support of its demurrer is that the complaint fails to allege that the claim was submitted to the village council for audit and allowance before suit, and that this was required by G. S. 1913, § 1300. This section reads as *95follows: “No money demand against sueb…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State v. StroscheinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- City of Mankato v. Barber Asphalt Paving Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1905
- Becklin v. BecklinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Barrett v. Village of HammondWisconsin Supreme Court · 1894
- Harrigan v. . City of BrooklynNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Decker v. MontagueSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
- Naeseth v. Village of HibbingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
- Cahill v. Beltrami CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1947
- Berg v. Village of ChisholmSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
- Simmons v. Northern Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.