Schloss v. George E. Lennon, Inc.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Plaintiff’s motion in the district court for Hamsey county for an order amending the record, verdict and judgment in the above entitled action, so as to show that the verdict and judgment were not upon the merits but upon the sole defense of the defendant therein that there was another action pending, was heard before Dickson, J\, who ordered that the verdict theretofore entered in the action be amended by adding thereto the words “that there is a prior action now pending…
Read the full summary
Plaintiff’s motion in the district court for Hamsey county for an order amending the record, verdict and judgment in the above entitled action, so as to show that the verdict and judgment were not upon the merits but upon the sole defense of the defendant therein that there was another action pending, was heard before Dickson, J\, who ordered that the verdict theretofore entered in the action be amended by adding thereto the words “that there is a prior action now pending between the parties hereto for the same cause of action sued on herein” and that the judgment theretofore entered be…
1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.
Action to recover the balance due for goods sold and delivered-The answer was a general denial and in abatement, the pendency of another suit upon the same cause of action. Upon the trial defendant admitted the debt, and the sole issue litigated was the pendency of the prior action. At the conclusion of the evidence each party moved for a directed verdict. The court denied plaintiff’s motion and granted defendant’s, instructing the jury in these words: “Upon the evidence as it stands in this case, gentlemen, it appears that there is a prior action pending, and under the law the plaintiff is…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Chase v. WhittenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
- McClure v. BruckSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- Packard v. Kinzie Avenue Heights Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
- Williams v. HayesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1887
- Wright v. KrabbenhoftSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Hafner v. HafnerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1952
- Connelly v. Carnegie Dock & Fuel Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1921
- F. Tru. Sav. Bk. v. U.S. Fid. Gua.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
- National Council of Knights & Ladies of Security v. SilverSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
- First Trust & Savings Bank v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.