Legal Opinion

Warner v. Foote

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided February 12, 1889PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Action to foreclose a mortgage, brought in the district court for Hennepin county, and tried by Searle, J., (acting for a judge of the 4th district,) who ordered judgment for plaintiff. A motion for a new trial was denied by Lochren, J., and the defendants appealed.

1Opinion of the CourtVanderburgh, J.

In this case the defendant set up a counterclaim for the value of goods sold and delivered. On the trial the evidence in his behalf tended to prove a cause of action for damages, for the conversion of the goods, and sounding in tort. The plaintiff expressly consented to the admission of the evidence under the answer, and offered evidence in rebuttal thereof, so that the matter was treated by the parties as a legitimate subject of counterclaim in the action. Under these circumstances the evidence should have been considered by the court, and a finding made thereon. The court made no finding…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. City of Winona v. Minnesota Railway Construction Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1880
  2. Day v. Putnam InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1871
  3. Walker v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1881
  4. Mississippi & Rum River Boom Co. v. PrinceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
  5. Lace v. FixenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Bahnsen v. GilbertSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
  2. Smith v. KippSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
  3. State ex rel. Norris v. District Court First Judicial DistrictSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
  4. Downs v. FinneganSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894
  5. Naffke v. NaffkeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1953

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API