First State Bank v. Schatz
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for He Sueur county to recover $1,050 on two promissory notes. The substance of the answer is stated in the opinion. From an order, Morrison, J., granting plaintiff’s motion to strike out the answer to the complaint, defendant appealed. From an order denying the motion of defendant to dissolve and vacate the writ of attachment issued in the action, he appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtStart, C. J.
This action was commenced in the district court of the county of Le Sueur to recover the amount due on two promissory notes made by the defendant to the plaintiff. A writ of attachment was issued, on the ground that the defendant was about to assign and dispose of his property with intent to defraud his creditors, and by virtue thereof his property was attached. He then moved the court to dissolve *426the attachment, and upon a hearing of the matter the court made its order denying the motion-, from which the-defendant appealed.
The affidavits in support of the motion tended to show that the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- King v. Duluth, Missabe & Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
- First National Bank v. RandallSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
- Simpson v. EvansSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- Trudeau v. GermannSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
- Finance Co. of Pennsylvania v. HurseySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
3Cited by9 opinions
- Minneapolis Gaslight Co. v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- J. R. Watkins Medical Co. v. McCallSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911
- Dickson v. Kilgore State BankTexas Commission of Appeals · 1924
- Foster County State Bank v. LammersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1912
- Tremont v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.