Rustad v. Bishop
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the municipal court of Duluth against James Bishop, defendant, and Scott & Holston Lumber Company, garnishee. From an order, Gearhart, special judge, setting aside a judgment in favor of plaintiffs and against the garnishee and releasing it from liability to plaintiffs on account of certain processes of garnishment theretofore issued, plaintiffs appealed. ■
1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.
That this is a case in which plaintiffs’ attorneys have attempted to oppress the defendant by means of legal process is very evident, when we state the facts..
The defendant, a laboring man with a family, a resident of the city of Duluth, became indebted to the plaintiffs in a sum exceeding $50. Suit was brought against him September 8, 1899, and at the same time the garnishee company, for whom defendant worked as a teamster, was served with a summons in the garnishment proceedings, returnable September 18. At the hearing the garnishee disclosed an indebtedness of $31.50, and defendant claimed…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Collins v. ChaseSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1880
- McNally v. WilkinsonSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1897
- Sheehan v. NewpickSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
3Cited by3 opinions
- Erb-Kidder, Co. v. LevyMichigan Supreme Court · 1933
- In Re MeyerUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota · 1989
- Wood v. E. M. Bangs. Sutorius Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1937