Legal Opinion
Echternacht v. King
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided March 22, 1935No. 30,239PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
Hilton, Justice.
Plaintiff appeals from an order sustaining the demurrer of defendants to the complaint on the ground that it failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action for libel.
The complaint recites that some time prior to August 17, 1933, plaintiff with •several other citizens of Jackson county, Minnesota, petitioned the governor for the removal of B. E. Grottum as county attorney because of nonfeasance and malfeasance in the performance of his official duties. The charges against the county attorney were that he had failed to investigate or prosecute several of the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Shaw Cleaners & Dyers, Inc. v. Des Moines Dress ClubSupreme Court of Iowa · 1932
- Pratt v. Pioneer Press Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1882
- Landon v. WatkinsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
- Ten Broeck v. Journal Printing Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Cleary v. WebsterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
3Cited by1 opinion
- Marudas v. OdegardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943