Legal Opinion

Weberling v. Bursell

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided May 2, 1930No. 27,882PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Olsen, C.

Plaintiff appeals from an order sustaining demurrers to his complaint on the ground that it fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.

Plaintiff held an unrecorded deed to an undivided one-half of 320 acres of farm land in Martin county, Minnesota. The deed was given on July 18, 1922. At the time it was given plaintiff already, held title to the other undivided one-half of the land. On October 28, 1927, the defendants Lavinia Bursell and Sarah Brewer became the owners of 80 acres of the land by foreclosure of a mortgage and expiration of the time for redemption.…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Falvey v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
  2. Gould v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
  3. La Paul v. HeywoodSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911
  4. Braddock Iron Mining Co. v. ErskineSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
  5. Maxwell v. HatherlySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Independent-Consolidated School District No. 27 v. WaldronSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
  2. Sloan v. City of DuluthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
  3. State v. Rhude & FrybergerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1963
  4. State Ex Rel. Burnquist v. Barrett & Zimmerman, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1949
  5. State v. Rhude & FrybergerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1963

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

Powered by the Exa API