O'Keefe v. Lenfest
Supreme Court of Minnesota
The plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Anoka county to recover for the conversion of personal property. The cause, being regularly on the calendar, was duly called for trial on the first day of the September term of court. The attorneys for the defendant not being in court, the attorney for the plaintiff requested that the case be set for trial on a subsequent day.
Read the full summary
The plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Anoka county to recover for the conversion of personal property. The cause, being regularly on the calendar, was duly called for trial on the first day of the September term of court. The attorneys for the defendant not being in court, the attorney for the plaintiff requested that the case be set for trial on a subsequent day. The court declined to set the case, and directed that it either be tried or stricken from the calendar. Thereupon the plaintiff proceeded with the trial, and judgment was directed in her favor. Defendant…
1Opinion of the CourtGileillan, C. J.
The evidence in this ease is sufficient to sustain a finding that the' goods for the conversion of which the action is brought were taken from the actual possession of the plaintiff. So far as the motion for a new trial was based on the alleged misconduct of the plaintiff, and surprise on the part of defendant, the same consisting in plaintiff’s proceeding with the trial when the cause was called in its order on the calendar, instead of having it set for a day certain, and giving defendant notice of it, as his attorney had agreed with defendant’s attorney to do, it was properly denied,…
2Cited by1 opinion
- People's Ice Co. v. SchlenkerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892