Legal Opinion

Bass v. Ring

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 11, 1941No. 32,665PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Stone, Justice.

In this action, somewhat in the nature of one for an accounting, plaintiff got judgment for a smaller amount than claimed. He appeals.

As of May 31, 1935, plaintiff was owner of 40 per cent, and defendants M. J. and Vera Ring had the other 60 per cent, of the stock of the Ring Construction Company, then a successful going concern in the business indicated by its name. By written contract, plaintiff agreed to sell and defendants to buy his stock for its then book value, to be determined by audit, with the privilege on either side to have another made as a check upon the first.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Reynes v. DumontSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
  2. Embry v. PalmerSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  3. Tyler v. SheaNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Pust v. HoltzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
  5. Thwing v. McDonaldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Carle v. CarleTexas Supreme Court · 1950
  2. De Witt v. Liberty Leasing Company of AlaskaAlaska Supreme Court · 1972
  3. Fidelity Bank & Trust Co. v. FitzimonsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
  4. Adolph Gottscho, Inc. v. American Marking Corp.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1958
  5. Hogg v. First National Bank of AberdeenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1986

8 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