Legal Opinion

Miller v. Shepard

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 22, 1892PublishedCited by 15 opinions

Appeal by defendants Henry L. Shepard and Bertha L. Shepard, his wife, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Hooker, J., made November 3, 1891, denying their motion for a new trial. Action to foreclose a lien for a furnace and materials, sold by' plaintiffs William Miller and David Allen, copartners, to James L. Stoddard.

Read the full summary

Appeal by defendants Henry L. Shepard and Bertha L. Shepard, his wife, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Hooker, J., made November 3, 1891, denying their motion for a new trial. Action to foreclose a lien for a furnace and materials, sold by' plaintiffs William Miller and David Allen, copartners, to James L. Stoddard. He had a contract with Henry L. Shepard to build a house on the east sixty (60) feet in width, of lots thirteen (13) and fourteen (14) of block two (2) in Nicollet Avenue Addition to Minneapolis. Stoddard put the furnace and materials into the house…

1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.

Defendant Shepard and one Little were severally the -owners of contiguous lots. Each contracted with one Stoddard for the erection of a dwelling house on his lot, and about the same time the two agreed to jointly erect a barn on the line between the lots, so that part of it would be on each lot, and appurtenant to the dwelling house being erected thereon. Pursuant to this arrangement, they contracted with Stoddard for the erection of the barn. Stoddard built the two houses, and also the barn, the latter being so located that five feet more of it was on one lot than on the other, and one end…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Jefferson v. Church of St. MatthewSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Standard Oil Co. v. DaySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
  2. Menzel v. TubbsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
  3. Small v. FoleyColorado Court of Appeals · 1896
  4. S. H. Harmon Lumber Co. v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  5. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Union State BankDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1927

10 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