Kruse v. Thompson
Supreme Court of Minnesota
On January 6, 1S79, the defendant, as sheriff of Hennepin county, by virtue of executions -issued on several judgments entered on that day, in the district court for that county, against one Eichelzer, a manufacturer and dealer in furs in the city of Minneapolis, levied pn and took possession of the Stock in trade, fixtures, etc., of the judgment debtor, and afterwards sold the same to satisfy the executions.
Read the full summary
On January 6, 1S79, the defendant, as sheriff of Hennepin county, by virtue of executions -issued on several judgments entered on that day, in the district court for that county, against one Eichelzer, a manufacturer and dealer in furs in the city of Minneapolis, levied pn and took possession of the Stock in trade, fixtures, etc., of the judgment debtor, and afterwards sold the same to satisfy the executions. At the time of the entry of the judgments, and for several years immediately preceding that day, the plaintiff had been a clerk for Eichelzer, and at the time of the levy there was due…
1Opinion of the CourtBeery, J.
Gen. Sl¡. 1878, c. 90, §§ 22, 23, read as follows :
Section 22. “That all moneys that may be due, or shall .hereafter become due, for labor or services rendered by any mechanic, clerk, laborer or servants, from any person or per■sons, or chartered company, employing mechanics, clerks, laborers or servants, either as owners, lessees, contractors, or under-owners of any works, manufactory, or other business of whatever description, where mechanics, clerks, laborers or •servants are employed, whether at so much per diem or other- ■ wdse, for any period not exceeding six months immediately…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Smith v. Shell Lake Lumber Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1887
- Olson v. PenningtonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Liljengren v. EgeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
- Schilling v. CarterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886