Hoit v. McIntire
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiffs George H. Hoit, George H. Hoit, Jr., and Fred 0. Hoit, partners as George H. Hoit & Co., from an order of the District Court, Hennepin County, Pond, J., made March 19, 1892, denying their motion for a new trial.
Read the full summary
Appeal by plaintiffs George H. Hoit, George H. Hoit, Jr., and Fred 0. Hoit, partners as George H. Hoit & Co., from an order of the District Court, Hennepin County, Pond, J., made March 19, 1892, denying their motion for a new trial. This action was brought on a check for $1,000, drawn by defendant H. H. Mclntire, November 28, 1890, on Bank of Commerce, West Superior, Wisconsin, and made payable to the plaintiffs, George H. Hoit & Co. On November 27, 1890, George H. Hoit, Jr., one of the plaintiffs, was the owner in fee simple of a certain tract of land in Minneapolis. On that day he entered…
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
Plaintiffs’ assignments of error are exclusively of two classes: First, that the. court erred in making certain findings of fact; and, second, that it erred in certain of its conclusions of law. The first were not discussed by counsel, either in his brief or in his oral argument, and he has nowhere attempted to point out wherein these'findings were erroneous. These assignments of error must, therefore, be deemed abandoned, and the facts as found must be taken as correct.
Hence the case comes down to the single question whether the conclusions of law are justified by the findings of fact. These…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hasse v. American Express Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1892
3Cited by2 opinions
- Harris v. Geneva Mill Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1923
- Lundell v. CheneySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892