Gould v. City of St. Paul
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Ramsey county for partition of a certain city lot. The answer alleged that in October, 1908, plaintiff began a proceeding to register title to the real estate and defendant was required to answer the application, which it did, and the proceeding was still pending. Further answering defendant alleged that the court had no jurisdiction of the subject-matter of the action.
Read the full summary
Action in the district court for Ramsey county for partition of a certain city lot. The answer alleged that in October, 1908, plaintiff began a proceeding to register title to the real estate and defendant was required to answer the application, which it did, and the proceeding was still pending. Further answering defendant alleged that the court had no jurisdiction of the subject-matter of the action. The case was tried before Dickson, L, who made findings and as conclusion of law found that plaintiff was entitled to no relief, and that defendant city was entitled to a valid lien upon the…
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
Action for the partition of real property, in which defendant prevailed on the trial below, and plaintiff appealed from an order denying a new trial. The short facts are as follows:
The property involved in the action is lot 14 in block 51, Lawton Bros. Addition to St. Paul. It was sold by the state in November, 1907, in forfeited tax proceedings, for the taxes remaining delinquent for the years 1891, 1892, and 1901 to 1906, inclusive. A forfeited tax deed was duly issued to the National Bond & Surety Company, a corporation, the purchaser at the sale. No redemption was ever made, though proper…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance v. WoodMichigan Supreme Court · 1898
- Dyke v. WhyteSupreme Court of Colorado · 1892
- State v. BellinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
- State ex rel. Kipp v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1901
- White v. KnowltonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1901
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Thomas v. PattersonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1916
- Bosworth v. AndersonIdaho Supreme Court · 1929
- Waltom v. City of PortalesNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1938
- Armstrong Products Corp. v. MartinWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1937
- People v. Taylorville Sanitary DistrictIllinois Supreme Court · 1939
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.