Legal Opinion

Woodford v. Reynolds

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 9, 1886PublishedCited by 4 opinions

In this action judgment was entered in the district court for Lincoln county, in favor of plaintiff, for the sum of $1,893.61. Thereafter the defendant brought an action in the same court to have the-judgment declared satisfied because of an alleged release under seal, which action is still pending and undecided. After the commencement of this last action, the defendant applied to the court for an order to enter a satisfaction of the judgment.

Read the full summary

In this action judgment was entered in the district court for Lincoln county, in favor of plaintiff, for the sum of $1,893.61. Thereafter the defendant brought an action in the same court to have the-judgment declared satisfied because of an alleged release under seal, which action is still pending and undecided. After the commencement of this last action, the defendant applied to the court for an order to enter a satisfaction of the judgment. The plaintiff opposed the application, upon the grounds that the judgment had not in fact been satisfied and that the action brought by the defendant…

1Opinion of the CourtBerry, J.

Whenever a judgment is satisfied in fact otherwise than, upon an execution, it is the duty of the party or attorney to give an acknowledgment of satisfaction, and, upon motion, the court may compel it, or may order the entry of satisfaction to be made without, it. Gen. St. 1878, c. 66, § 286. There can be no reason why a judgment debtor, or other person interested, should not have relief, under this provision of statute, when, as in Ives v. Phelps, 16 Minn. 407, (451,) there is no controversy as to the facts showing satisfaction. But there can be no doubt that the controversy as to such facts…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Lamprey v. HenkSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1871

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Warren v. WardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1904
  2. Olsen v. NelsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
  3. State Bank of Lansing v. McLauryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
  4. Peterson v. First & Security State Bank of CrosbyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1931

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

Powered by the Exa API