Unowsky v. Show

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 23, 1925

Supreme Court of Minnesota · decided 1925-01-23

Relies on Rodgers v. United States & Dominion Life Insurance · Grady v. Maurice L. Rothschild & Co.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1925-01-23

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently June 1980

3 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Dibell, J.

¶1 Judgment was entered against the defendants by default. On their motion it was vacated with leave to answer. The plaintiff appeals.

¶2 *490 Upon the service of the summons the defendants engaged counsel. He prepared answers. Through inadvertence they were placed in his office files and were not served. Promptly upon notice of the entry of judgment this motion was made. There was no substantial prejudice to the plaintiff. The trial court exercised its discretion wisely, if it was properly invoked, in vacating the judgment and permitting a defense. Rodgers v. U. S. & D. Ins. Co. 127 Minn. 435, 149 N. W. 671, and cases cited.

¶3 But it is said that there was no affidavit of merits. The statute requires none. G. S. 1923, § 9283; G. S. 1913, § 7786. The court rule making such requirement may be waived if merits appear from the record as they do here. Grady v. Maurice L. Rothschild & Co. 145 Minn. 74, 176 N. W. 153; Dunnell, Minn. Dig. § 5020.

¶4 Order affirmed.