Legal Opinion

Briggs v. Rutherford

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 23, 1904No. Nos. 14,131—(153)PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Mille Lacs county, Searle, J., granting a motion for a new trial, after a trial and verdict in favor of plaintiff for $56.51.

1Opinion of the CourtDouglas, J.

This action was brought to recover the amount advanced upon an option contract for the purchase of real estate. The issues of fact were submitted under clear and explicit instructions, and determined by the jury in its verdict in favor of the plaintiff. The trial court granted a new trial upon the ground that a material variance existed between the pleadings and the proof, and also suggested generally that other questions were argued, and that such motion was granted upon an inspection of the whole record.

The complaint was for money had and received, which it was alleged “defendant promised…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Adams v. CastleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
  2. Fitger v. GuthrieSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
  3. Root v. ChildsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1897

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Gay v. KelleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1909
  2. French v. State Farmers' Mutual Hail InsuranceNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Shaw v. StaightSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1909
  4. Garedpy v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
  5. Hobart v. KehoeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1910

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API