Shapira v. Barney
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the municipal court of St. Paul.
1Opinion of the Court
Mitchell, J.*
This was an action for the wrongful conversion of a wooden platform, the alleged personal property of the plaintiff. The question for consideration is whether the findings of fact of the court below are sustained by the evidence. Upon examination we think the evidence reasonably tends to prove the following state of facts, to wit: That the platform in question was erected in defendant’s building, by Finkelstein & Co., his tenants, while occupying it as a furniture store; that they erected it with the knowledge and consent of defendant, and at their own expense, to be used in…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Hardie v. PetersonMontana Supreme Court · 1929
- White Enamel Refrigerator Co. v. KruseSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- Winnike v. HeymanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1918
- Cohen v. WhitcombSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
- Holy Ghost Catholic Church v. ClintonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926