Legal Opinion

First National Bank v. Klimenhagen

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 6, 1924No. 23,996PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilson, C. J.

Action by plaintiff to recover on a promissory note and to enforce by judicial sale its rights to collateral thereto. The answer alleges that the note was procured by fraud.

The facts are substantially these: On November 15, 1920, defendant was solicited, by one Earl Gernert, to buy stock in the Austin Clay Works, and on that day he gave his note to Gernert for $1,250 payable “to the order of myself” 6 months after date. He indorsed the note. This note together with á liberty bond for $100 was given for 12J shares of stock in the Austin Clay Works. The certificate of this stock was then…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State Bank of Morton v. AdamsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
  2. Goedhard v. FolstadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
  3. First National Bank v. CareySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
  4. Midland National Bank v. Farmers Co-operative Elevator Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1923

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Olsen v. HoffmannSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
  2. Pioneer Trust Co. v. CombsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1924
  3. Harwood State Bank v. Hendrum Co-Operative Elevator Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
  4. Thomes v. AtkinsDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1943

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API