Whitney v. Smith
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiffs from an order of the district court for Ramsey county, Simons, J., presiding, refusing a new trial after a trial by the court without a jury. In addition to the facts stated in the opinion, the absence of Robert. Smith and bis heirs from the state was relied on by plaintiffs as taking the case out of the statute of limitations.
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
On May 31, 1851, Robert Smith, the ancestor of defendants, executed a contract to convey, free of incumbrances, to Joel *125Whitney and D. A. J. Baker, plaintiff’s grantors, all the right, title, and interest which he then had in Whitney & Smith’s addition to St. Paul. In execution of this contract, Smith, on the 19th day of September, 1851, executed to Whitney & Baber a deed of conveyance, with covenants of title, of a large number of lots in Whitney & Smith’s addition, reciting that they were all his interest in said addition. It is alleged in the complaint that, in addition to the lots…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Seitzinger ex rel. Drinkel v. WeaverSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1829
- Houghtaling v. LewisNew York Supreme Court · 1813
- Hileman v. WrightIndiana Supreme Court · 1857
- Wilson v. M'NealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840
- Stecker v. ShimerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840
3Cited by10 opinions
- Herbst v. LoweWisconsin Supreme Court · 1886
- Griffin v. Societe Anonyme la FloridienneSupreme Court of Florida · 1907
- Humble v. St. JohnMontana Supreme Court · 1925
- Bruggeman v. Jerry's Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
- Hubachek v. Estate of BrownSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.