Griffith v. Dowd
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action of replevin in the district court fox Mower county by the co-partners doing business as the Griffith-MeMurray Company against the copartners doing business under the firm name of James Dowd & Son.
Read the full summary
Action of replevin in the district court fox Mower county by the co-partners doing business as the Griffith-MeMurray Company against the copartners doing business under the firm name of James Dowd & Son. Defendants’ answer set up a counterclaim as stated in the first paragraph of the opinion, and upon the motion of plaintiffs the cause of action set up in the complaint was dismissed, Kingsley, J., without prejudice to defendants’ counterclaim as set forth in the pleadings and the prosecution thereof as though the order of dismissal had not been made. The case was tried before Quinn, J., and a…
1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.
Plaintiffs are railroad contractors of Kansas City, Missouri, and brought this action in replevin to recover a grading and camp outfit alleged to be wrongfully withheld by defendant, and damages for the detention thereof. The action was based upon defendants’ alleged default in the payment of an $8,000 note secured by a chattel mortgage on the outfit, which was then in possession of defendants in Houston county, Minnesota. A bond of $25,000 was furnished, the statutory affidavit made, and the sheriff took the outfit into his possession. Defendants interposed an answer to the complaint,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Spaulding v. Coeur D'Alene Railway & Navigation Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1897
- Dubois v. Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.New York Supreme Court · 1834
- W. W. Kimball Co. v. MasseySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
- Shephard v. St. Charles Western Plank Road Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1859
- Hackney v. FetschSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
3Cited by1 opinion
- Geo. A. Hormel Company v. First National BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927