Legal Opinion
Fulton v. Okes
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided October 11, 1935No. 30,576PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
I. M. Olsen, Justice.
The appeal is by the defendants Margaret Ellen Hanlon and James W. Hanlon, as representatives of the estate of Edward J. Hanlon, deceased, from an order denying their motion to discharge the garnishees and dismiss the garnishment proceeding in the action on the ground that the district court was without jurisdiction in the matter. The other defendants in the action are Day Okes and Sidney R. Okes, as surviving partners of the firm of Hanlon & Okes. The partnership consisted of Edward J. Hanlon, Day Okes, and Sidney R. Okes, and was dissolved by the death of Edward J.…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Sache v. WallaceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
- Plano Manufacturing Co. v. KaufertSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
- State ex rel. Lindekugel v. Probate Court of Sibley CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
- Mousseau v. MousseauSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Leland v. HeibergSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Alfred v. AndersonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1974
- In Re Judicial Ditch No. 12Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1949
- Whittier v. AtkinsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1940
- Mangos v. MangosSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1962
- State ex rel. Great Northern Railway Co. v. District Court of the Sixteenth Judicial DistrictSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1949
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.