Bruce v. Hoidal
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Hennepin county to determine that .defendant Weum hold the title to certain land in Polk county in trust for defendant Hoidal, and to permit plaintiff to issue a writ of attachment against the land until the final determination of two •other actions by plaintiff against defendant Hoidal. Erom an order, Dickinson, J., sustaining defendants’ demurrer to the complaint, plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.
Appeal from an order sustaining a demurrer to a complaint in the nature of a creditor’s bill. To an understanding of the question presented, this short summary of the facts alleged may be sufficient: June 18, 1910, plaintiff contracted to buy from defendant Hoidal certain lands in Canada. In September following Hoidal induced plaintiff to turn over .to him the purchase price, but has fathed to deliver the deed as agreed, or give possession of the land, and by reason thereof plaintiff lost, in addition to the land, the opportunity to crop *363it, and lie asks for specific performance or damages.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Case v. BeauregardSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Pendleton v. PerkinsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1872
- Wadsworth v. SchisselbauerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
- Overmire v. HaworthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
- Williams v. KemperSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.