McCormick v. Hoffert
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
Olseñ, J.
Plaintiff appeals from the judgment. The case was tried ¡before the court without a jury. A motion for amended findings of fact and conclusions of law was made and denied. There was no motion for a new trial.
Plaintiff and defendant were husband and wife. On December 31, 1925, a judgment was entered in a pending divorce suit between the parties granting plaintiff an absolute divorce from defendant. The parties had one child then about two years old. Pending the divorce action negotiations were had between the parties for the purpose of agreeing upon the alimony, custody and support of…
2Cited by4 opinions
- CAROGA REALTY COMPANY v. TapperSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1966
- Mienes v. Lucker Sales Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1933
- McHardy v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
- CAROGA REALTY COMPANY v. TapperSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1966