Volume 23 — Minnesota Reports

Writ of habeas corpus, issued from this court, and directed to the respondent as sheriff of Ramsey county, who made return that he held the petitioner under the commitment mentioned in the opinion, a copy of which was annexed to the return, in which commitment the proceedings mentioned iii the opinion are fully recited, as well as the fiict made to appear to the district court that there was no common jail in Wright county. To this return the petitioner demurred,

Plaintiff recovered judgment against defendant, in a justice’s court, on January 6, 1875. On January 13, 1875, the defendant served on the plaintiff a notice of appeal to the district court, on questions of law and fact, made the required affidavit as to the good faith of the appeal, and executed the proper bond. On January 16th the justice made the following entry in his docket in the case: “January 16, 1875.

Appeal by defendants from an order of the district court for Hennepin county refusing a new trial, the action having been tried before Vanderburgh, J., without a jury. argued that the Gen. St. c. 34, title 2, does not authorize the corporations organized thereunder to issue commercial paper, citing Rochester Ins. Co. v. Martin, 13 Minn. 59 ; Bank of Augusta v. Earle, 13 Peters, 519, 587.

The St. Louis Mutual Life Insurance Company (to whose business and liabilities the plaintiff has succeeded) issued a policy of insurance for $2,000, on the life of Henry Young, payable to the defendant Magdalena Young. Upon the death of Henry Young, the Alliance Company, defendant, claimed the insurance money, as assignee of Magdalena Young.

Appeal by plaintiffs from a judgment of the district court for Winona county, after a trial before Mitchell, J., without a jury. The action was brought against the city, its mayor, and marshal, to restrain the latter from enforcing an order of tbe city council, and removing a wooden awning in front of plaintiffs’ buildings.

<p>Foreclosure by Action — Mortgagee in Possession — Ejectment.—G. and S. held a senior mortgage, plaintiff a junior mortgage. G. and S. foreclosed their mortgage, by suit to which plaintiff was not made a party, and, at the sale under the decree, bid in the property in separate parcels, and, after the time to redeem expired, conveyed by quitclaim to G., and he conveyed to defendant, who is now in possession. Plaintiff offered to redeem one of the parcels sold at the G. and S. foreclosure, by paying the amount bid for such parce], and interest, which offer was declined, and he afterwards foreclosed his mortgage by advertisement, and became the pui’chaser at his sale, and he brings this suit to eject defendant. Held, 1. That by their quitclaim deed the entire interest of G. and S. passed to &., and by his deed passed to defendant, so that the latter may, as against plaintiff, claim to stand in the position of a mortgagee in possession, who cannot be ejected without payment of the mortgage.</p> <p>Same — Redemption by Junior Mortgagee, not Party to the Suit. — 2. That a party having a right to redeem from a mortgage which has been foreclosed, but not so as to bind him, cannot redeem from the foreclosure sale, but must, if he redeem at all, redeem from 'the entire mortgage, by paying the whole of it.</p>

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Isanti county, Vanderburgh, J., presiding, overruling a demurrer to the complaint.

The defendant instituted proceedings to condemn, for the purposes of its railway, certain lots of plaintiff on the Mississippi river, on one of which was a wheat-warehouse. The plaintiff appealed from the award of the commissioners to the district court for Houston county, where a trial was had before Page, J., and a verdict rendered for an amount larger than that awarded by the commissioners. A new trial was refused, and the defendant appealed.

Action on a promissory note, by endorsees, against the makers. Defence, that the note was given for part of the purchase-money upon a sale of a patent-right, and that the vendor (payee) had failed to comply with any of the provisions of Laws 1871, c. 26. At the trial in the court of common pleas of Ramsey county, before Brill, J., evidence was received, under objection and exception, in support of this defence.

Action against the defendants, Ovid Pinney and JaneBrockway, partners as Pinney & Broclcway, upon five-orders, amounting in all to $4,100, drawn upon the-defendant Pinney, and signed in the firm name “by William; Brockway, agent.” At the trial in the district court forHennepin county, before Vanderburgh, J., it appeared that.

<p>Case certified by the district court for Fillmore county, Page, J., presiding.</p>

<p>Case certified by the district court for Wabasha county, Mitchell, J., presiding.</p>

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Ramsey county, Stearns, J., presiding, (acting for the judge of the second district,) granting a new trial.

This action was brought in the court of common pleas of Eamsey county, and was tried before Simons, J., and a jury. At the close of the evidence for plaintiffs the action was dismissed, on defendant’s motion. A new trial was refused, and the plaintiffs appealed.

Mandamus to compel the delivery to the relator, who claimed to be the treasurer of Cass county, of the books, papers, etc., belonging to that office. From the alternative writ and the answer it appeared that Cass county was declared to be organized by Laws 1872, c. 79, pursuant to which act the county seat was located at 'West Brainerd.

This action was brought in the district court for Nicollet county, to set aside a judgment entered on an award of arbitrators, and, on appeal, affirmed by this court, (Johnston v. Paul, 22 Minn. 17,) and for an account of the profits of the business of a certain tannery, carried on by plaintiff and defendant, which was among the matters submitted to, and passed on, by the arbitrators.

Plaintiff obtained judgment against defendants in the court of common pleas of Ramsey county, and caused execution thereon to bo issued to Nobles county, by virtue of Avhich execution the sheriff of that county levied upon a judgment which had theretofore been recovered by the defendants Miller, Ilumiston & Co., against the defendants C. Z. Sutton and James Lundy, in the district court for Nobles county, and ivas docketed, therein.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Nicollet county, Ilcmscome, J., presiding, overruling a demurrer to the complaint. The substance of the complaint is stated in the opinion.

This action was brought in the district court for St. Louis county, on January 21, 1875, against the defendant Marcotte, and on the same day Michael Pastoret was summoned as garnishee.

Replevin for a sewing-machine and attachments. Answer, alleging property in defendant.

This action was brought in the district court for Mower county, and ivas regularly on the calendar for trial at the March term, 1875. On March 2d — the first day of the term — the defendant duly served an offer to allow judgment to be taken against him for $100, and costs to the date of the offer. The offer was not accepted. On March 12th the cause was tried by a jury, and plaintiff had a verdict for but $50.

By contract under seal, made March 25, 1872, the defendant agreed to soli and convoy in fee to plaintiff “ the west half of the north-east quarter of the north-east quarter of section numbered five, (5,) in township numbered forty-seven, (47,) north, of range numbered four, (4,) in the district of lands subject to sale at Bayfield, state of Wisconsin, containing twenty acres, more or less,” for $10,000, of which $1,000 was to be paid upon the execution of the contract,…

Appeal by defendants from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Vanderburgh, J., presiding, denying a motion to set aside a judgment in favor of plaintiffs, entered on an award of arbitrators.

<p>Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Dakota county, Crosby, J., presiding, refusing a new trial.</p>

This action was commenced in a justice’s court, where plaintiffs had judgment. The defendant having appealed on questions of law alone, the district court for Fillmore county, Page-, J., presiding, reversed the judgment of the justice, on the ground that the complaint failed to state a cause of action, and the plaintiffs appealed.

<p>Appeal by defendants from a judgment of the court of common pleas of Ramsey county, entered pursuant to an order of Brill, J.</p>

This action was brought in the district coxxx-t for Bice county, aixd tried before Loud, J., and a jury, who found a verdict for plaiixtiff, oxx which judgment was entered, and defexxdant appealed.

Appeal by defendants from a judgment of the district court for Olmsted county, where the action was tried before Mitchell, J., without a jury.

<p>The defendant was tried and convicted in the municipal court of the citj1- of Minneapolis, upon the following complaint: [Title] “ Margaret E. Stoops, being duly sworn, makes complaint to the above-named court, and says that on the 16th day of February, A. D. 1876, at the city of Minneapolis, in said county, Christian H. A. Eichter, then and there being, did wilfully, unlawfully, and wrongfully sell and dispose of spirituous liquor to a minor person, in this, that he, the said Christian H. A. Eichter, then and there being, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully, and wrongfully sell throe glasses of gin to one Ira Cole, ivho was then and there a minor person, as he, the said Christian H. A. Eichter, then and there well know, contrary to the statute,” etc. Anew trial was refused, and defendant appealed.</p>

This action was brought in January, 1866, in the district court for Houston county, to foreclose a mortgage of lands in that county, bearing date May 6, 1856, made by defendant to one L. H. Smith, who died in 1857, and of whose estate plaintiff claimed to be administrator. The plaintiff alleged that one Kelly had fraudulently, and without consideration, obtained possession of the mortgage and mortgage notes, and had delivered them to defendant, who still retained them.

This, like Holley v. Huntington, 21 Minn. 325, was an action brought in the district court for Faribault county for money paid by plaintiff, to the use of the defendants Elizabeth J. Huntington and Benjamin G. Reynolds, under ■a contract which is thus set forth in the complaint: In the year 1871, the plaintiff and the defendants, together with H. W. Holley, J. S. Robertson, and George K. Moulton, entered into an agreement with each other to erect a block of four brick…

The plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Hennepin county, against R. J. Mendenhall and R. J. Baldwin, to recover moneys deposited with them as partners under the name of the State Savings Association, a firm originally composed of defendants and one T. A. Morphy. The defendant Baldwin answered, denying the partnership, and alleging that the Savings Association was a corporation.

Appeal by defendant Stewart from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Vanderburgh, J., presiding, refusing a new trial after a trial by the court without a jury.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Vanderburgh, J., presiding, refusing; a new trial after verdict for the plaintiffs, who sue as partners, doing business in the name of Pancost, Sage & Morse..

The defendant was tried in the district court for Winona county, before Mitchell, J., on October 14, 1875, on an indictment for the larceny of $700, the property of one Wright.

This action was brought in the district court for St. Louis county, against the defendant McLaren and the defendants Noyes Brothers & Cutler, for the wrongful taking of-a stock of goods alleged to belong to plaintiffs. The property had originally belonged to E. Newman & Co., and was by them transferred to plaintiffs, on November 1, 1873.

The St. Paul & Sioux City Railroad Company, in March, 1874, presented its petition to the district court for Ramsey county, setting forth, among other things, that it would be necessary for it to appropriate, for the purposes of its road, certain real estate in the city of St. Paul, described in the petition as follows : i‘ Commencing at a point in the centre line of Wabasha street, north of, and nineteen feet distant from, the centre line of the main track of said railroad…

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the court of common pleas of Eamsey county, Simons, ,J., presiding, sustaining a demurrer to the complaint.

The action was begun in a justice’s court, where plaintiffs. liad judgment. Defendants appealed, upon questions of law alone, to the district court for Ramsey county, where the judgment of the justice was affirmed, after a hearing before Simons, J., and the defendants appealed to this court.

Defendant was convicted, in a justice’s court, of the offence of selling liquor in a quantity less than five gallons, without having first obtained a license therefor. The offence was committed in the town of Pine Island, in Good-hue county.

Action to recover $1,368.05, alleged to be due under a contract of hiring of plaintiff1 by defendant, for a year, from August 17, 1874, at a salary of $1,800, the complaint stating that plaintiff worked faithfully under the contract, from August 17, 1874, until April 19, 1875, when he was discharged without cause, and having been paid but $431.95.

Appeal by plaintiffs, partners as De Graff & Co., from an order of the court of common pleas of Ramsey county, Bimons, J., presiding, sustaining a demurrer to the complaint. *

Action to restrain the city of Reel Wing, one of the-defendants, from issuing to the defendant the St. Paul & Chicago Railway Company its municipal bonds, which, to-the amount of $85,000, the city, under legislative authority, had contracted to issue to the company, on condition that its railway should be completed and put into successful operation between St. Paul and Winona, or some other point south of Red Wing having railway connection with Milwaukee and Chicago, on or…

This action was brought in the district court for Rice county, to restrain the defendant from carrying into effect an ordinance providing for the opening of a street east and west across plaintiff’s depot grounds, in the city of Faribault. These grounds, 1,340 feet in length from north to south, were acquired by the Minnesota Central Railroad Company, (to whoso rights the plaintiff has succeeded) by condemnation under its charter.

Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the district court for Kandiyohi county, entered pursuant to the decision and order of John II. Broion, J.

Action upon a promissory note for $1,000, bearing date April 1, 1867, and payable one year thereafter, brought by the executors of Lyman Montgomery, the pajme, against 'the maker.

This action ivas brought in the court of commom pleas of Hennepin county, by plaintiffs, as assignees of William S. Judd, under a general assignment for the benefit of creditors, to recover the price of lumber sold by Judd to defendants. The defendants answered, alleging a set-off, as stated in the opinion. A demurrer to the answer was sustained by Young, J., and the defendants appealed.

Action for libel, brought by plaintiff, the only telegraph operator at Pine City, against the defendant, publisher of the Pioneer-Press newspaper. The paragraph complained of was published by defendant in its issue of June 19, 1875, as an item in a column headed “ State News,” and was as follows : “ The Pine City telegraph operator is a bad one.

Defendant was convlct-ed, before a justice of the peace, of the offence of selling liquor to an habitual drunkard, and sentenced to pay a fine of $50, and the costs, and to imprisonment on default of payment. On appeal on questions of law, the judgment of the justice was affirmed by the district court for Dodge county, and defendant appealed,

Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the court of common pleas of Ramsey county, where the action was tried before /Simons, J., a jury being waived.

Action against the defendant, a Kansas corporation, to recover the agreed price of 5,035.30 perch of stone, taken by the defendant from plaintiff’s land, under the circumstances stated in the opinion. The cause, being at issue, was called for trial at a general term of the district court for Hennepin county, Vanderburgh, J., presiding, on December 17, 1874, and a jury was called to try it.

Action on a promissory note, made by the defendant W. A. Stanchfield to the order of defendant Gaslin, and by him endorsed. Answer, (by defendant Gaslin,) a general denial. At the trial in the court of common pleas of Hennepin county, before Young, J., (a jury being Avaivcd,) the following findings of fact Avere made by the court.

Action on a promissory note by endorsee against maker. Defence, that the note was procured by fraud of one Mead, the payee, and was by him endorsed to plaintiff after maturity. At the trial in the district court for Winona county, before Mitchell, J., the defendant’s counsel, in addressing the jury, commented at considerable length upon evidence which had been offered by him, but excluded by the court.

Action against the maker and endorser of the following promissory note: $3,000. St. Paul, Minn., March 16, 1875. Three months (without grace) after date I promise to pay to the order of R. J. Baldwin three thousaud dollars, at the Farmers and Mechanics’ Bank, St. Paul, with interest at twelve per cent, per annum after maturity until paid. Value received. W. S. Judd. [Endorsed] R. J. Baldwin.

Defendant, having been indicted in the district court for Jackson county for a felonious assault, moved to quash the indictment, on the grounds stated in the opinion. The motion was denied by Dickinson, J., who thereupon, at defendant’s request, certified the caseto this court.

Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Kandiyohi county, against John M. Spicer, Andrew Larson, and Leonard Millard, praying that the sale of a certain yoke of oxen, on foreclosure of a mortgage on the oxen and certain other chattels, might be set aside as fraudulent, and the oxen delivered to plaintiff; or, if a return could not be had, that he recover their value, and for general relief.

Plaintiff having obtained a judgment against defendant of divorce and for alimony, in the district court for Sibley count}1', the defendant thereafter moved that the judgment be altered by reducing the amount of alimony awarded, and that a mortgage which defendant had given in part-satisfaction of the judgment might be released and delivered up to him, on the ground that it had been obtained from him by duress.

This was an action brought against the defendant, the state treasurer, for taking $150, the property of plaintiff; the purpose of the action being to determine the liability of plaintiff, as purchaser and owner of the line of railway formerly belonging to the St. Paul & Chicago Railway Company, to the tax on gross earnings imposed by thestatutcs cited in the opinion.

Appeal by plaintiffs from an order of the district court for St. Louis county, Stearns, J., presiding, sustaining the defendant Shillock’s demurrer to the complaint. The demurrer was for want of jurisdiction of the court over the subject of the action, and for failure of the complaint to state a cause of action, and was sustained on the former ground.

Appeal by plaintiffs from an order of the district court for Kamsey county, Wühin, J., presiding, dissolving an attachment of the property of defendant Adolph Munch.

This action was brought in the district court for Dakota county, and was tried before L. M. Brown, J., acting for the judge of the first district. The only evidence offered by plaintiffs of the assessment and levy of the taxes for which the lands were sold, or of any of the prior proceedings affecting the assessment or levy, were the tax duplicates of the city of Hastings for the several years for which the taxes involved in this action were claimed to be due.

Oertiorciri to review a judgment of the court of common pleas of Ramsey county, Simons, J., presiding, against certain real estate of plaintiff, for the amount charged against it in the reassessment for grading Ramsey street, in the city of St. Paul.

Appeal b)'- defendant from an order of the district court for Nicollet county, llameóme, J., presiding, granting anew trial.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the municipal court of the city of St. Paul, after a trial by the court, and the denial of a motion for a new trial.

Appeal by Karl, the claimant, from a judgment of the district court for Brown county, Hariscóme, J., presiding, against Hauenstein, the garnishee.

The plaintiff, as assignee of one James P. McClelland for the benefit of creditors, brought this action to recover the value of a largo amount of personal property, taken from plaintiff’s possession and sold by the defendant, as sheriff, by virtue of certain executions against the property of McClelland. In his answer the defendant assailed the assignment as made with intent to hinder, delay, and defraud the assignor’s creditors.

The defendant was tried before a justice of the peace in and for Wiuona city and county, on a complaint charging him with maintaining a nuisance in the said city, i( contrary to the provisions of an ordinance of this city, entitled an ordinance to prevent and abate nuisances.” This was the only mention of the ordinance in the complaint, nor was any proof of it made at the trial.

On October 16, 1871, the plaintiff of record, as assignee1 in bankruptcy of M. L. &M. D. Sproat, bankrupts,, recovered judgment by default, for $1,180.92,. against the defendant, in the district court for Ramsey county. The cause of action on which the suit was brought accrued in January, 1868, and was for labor and materials furnished in the erection of defendant’s house of worship, at Cottage Grove, in Washington county.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court for Ramsey county, where the action was tried before Brill, J., and a jury.

Action by plaintiff, as endorsee, against defendants, as makers of a promissory note payable at the First National Bank, Rochester, Minnesota, to the order of the Williams Mower and Reaper Company, Syracuse, New York. The plaintiff made title to the note through the following endorsement: “ Pay Third Nat.

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Washington county, Grosby, J., presiding, vacating a judgment. The judgment was entered on default, on July 8, 1867, and the application to vacate it was made on December 15, 1874. At the hearing in the court below it was stipulated that the defendant had notice of the judgment in May, 1868.

This was a proceeding instituted by defendant to condemn, for the use of its railway, certain land which is described in the petition, and in the award of the commissioners, as follows : “ Certain lands in the village of Read’s, bounded westward by Richards street, northward by the Mississippi river, eastward by Read’s addition to Pepin, and southward by a line parallel with and sixty feet northward of the northern line of block twenty-eight (28) in the recorded plat of the…

Plaintiff and his wife were driving, in the afternoon, in Mankato. Turning from State street into Byron street, their buggy struck a post at the intersection of the two streets, the plaintiff was thrown out, and his leg was broken. For the injuries thus received he brought this action.

In proceedings under the tax law of 1874, to enforce the payment of delinquent taxes in Bice county, the defendant interposed a defence to the tax assessed upon its banking-house in the city of Faribault, and returned as delinquent.

After the decision of this court on the former appeal, denying a new trial, (22 Minn. 514,) the case was remitted to the district court for Ramsey county, where the defendant again moved for a new trial, because of newly-discovered evidence, and also moved in arrest of judgment. Both motions were denied, and the defendant was sentenced to death, in accordance with the verdict of the jury. Ho appeals from the judgment, and from the order refusing a new trial.

The defendant was tried and convicted, in the district court for Waseca county, Lord, J., presiding, on an indictment for larceny of two horses.

Action by plaintiffs, as creditors of Sixtus Hoffman, deceased, against his administratrix and the sureties on her official bond.

In proceedings to enforce payment of taxes remaining delinquent, on June 1, 1875, for the county of Nobles, a tax judgment was entered in the district court for that county, against real estate of the defendant. A motion to vacate and set aside the judgment was denied by Dickinson, J., and the defendant attempted to appeal from the order denying his motion. The county attorney moved to dismiss the appeal for want of proper service of the notice.

This action having como on for trial in the district court for Houston county, Page, J., presiding, the defendant, Mathea Johnson, moved for a dismissal, for failure of the complaint to state a cause of action. The motion was granted, and judgment entered for defendant, from which the plaintiff appeals.

At the trial in the court of common pleas of Hennepin county, before Young, J., (a. jury being waived,) the defendant, at the close of plaintiff’s case, moved for a dismissal, on the ground that the plaintiff’s allegations of his-appointment as a foreign administrator, and' of the filing of such appointment in the probate court of Hennepin county, were put in issue by the answer, and no evidence had been offered to prove them. The motion was denied, the defendant excepting.

Appeal by defendants from an order of the district court for Blue Earth county, Dickinson, J., presiding, denying their motion that one H. Davis be made a party to the action.

‘The complaint in this action alleges that the plaintiff is duly organized and incorporated under and by virtue of the act of the territorial legislature of Minnesota, entitled “ An act to incorporate the Minnesota Western Railroad Company,” approved March 3, 1853, (Laws 1853, c. 10,) and several amendatory acts, viz., Laws 1855, c. 65 ; Sp. Laws 1869, c. 117 ; Sp. Laws 1870, c. 57 ; Sp.

The plaintiff, in his complaint, alleges that, on March 13,, 1873, he sold and delivered to the defendant 1,616,602 feet of pine logs, at the agreed price of $7.25 per thousand feet,, and amounting in all to $11,720.36 ; that no part of this, sum has been paid, except the sum of $7,678.86, paid partly in cash, and partly in the notes afterwards described in the complaint, and there still remains due to the plaintiff, upon such sale, the sum of $4,041.50, with interest from…

Action for breach of promise of marriage and seduction. Trial in the district court for Winona .county, before Mitchell, J., and verdict for plaintiff for $2,000. Motion for neiv trial because of newly-discovered evidence, misconduct of the jury, and excessive damages, upon which the court ordered that a new trial be had, unless plaintiff consent that the verdict be reduced to $650, in which case a new trial would be refused.

This action was brought in the district court for Hennepin county, by Augustus Parsons and William J. Parsons, against Anna M. Noggle, John R. Webb, and others, to sot aside the foreclosure of a mortgage, for leave to redeem, and for an account of rents and profits, etc. Among other things, the defendants pleaded that the canse of action did not accrue within ton years before the commencement of the action.

Plaintiffs brought this action in the court of common pleas of Hennepin county, to recover the sum of $1,512.15, being the unpaid residue of $16,170, which last amount was the appraised value of the improvements made by plaintiffs on certain leasehold premises, which appraised value the mill company, defendant, had covenanted in the lease to pay.

Action to foreclose a mortgage, brought by the insurance company and William R. Marshall, against Lorenzo Allis and Mary C. Allis, his wife, in the court of common pleas of Ramsey county, on March 13, 1875. Trial before Simons, J., who ordered judgment for plaintiffs, which was entered, and the defendant Mary C. Allis appealed.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court for Washington county, where the action was tried before Crosby, J., without a jury.

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the court of common pleas of Hennepin county, Young, J., presiding, refusing' a new trial. The action was for malicious prosecution, and the substance of the complaint is stated in the report of the next following case.

This action was brought in the court of common pleas of Hennepin county, against the defendant Cooley, judge of the municipal court of the city of Minneapolis, the defend•ant Davenport, clerk of that court, and others.

The defendant Miller and one Mattie Strickland were-jointly indicted, in the district court for Dakota county, for the offence of lewdly and lasciviously cohabiting together,, not being married to each other, and neither of them being-married.

This action was brought in the court of common pleas of Hennepin county, and was tried before Young, J., and a jury. At the close of plaintiff’.s case the action was ordered to be dismissed, on defendant’s motion, for failure of the plaiutiff to sustain his cause of action, to which order the plaintiff duly excepted. A new trial was refused, and plaintiff appealed.

This action was brought in the district court for Watonwan county, to restrain the defendant from applying for or receiving from the governor of the state any deed or conveyance of certain lands described in the complaint; the complaint also praying that plaintiff be adjudged to be the owner of the lands.

The plaintiff brought this action in the district court for McLeod county, praying that a certain mortgage, made to, her by the defendant the McLeod County Cheese-manufacturing Association might be corrected in respect of the description of the premises intended to be mortgaged, but misdescribed therein, and that, as reformed, the mortgage-might be declared to be a prior lien to that of a docketed judgment against the association in favor of the defendant Russell, and…

Oertiorari to reA'iew an order of the district court for Blue Earth county, Dickinson, J., presiding, denying the defendant’s motion for a change of venue.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Goodhue county, Crosby, J., presiding, refusing a new trial.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court for Olmsted county, where the action was tried before Mitchell, J., and a jury. The defendant objected, before the clerk of the district court, to the taxation of any costs against it, but the costs were taxed by the clerk and inserted iu the judgment, and, on appeal to the court, the clerk’s taxation was affirmed.

Action against the defendants E. R. George, Eliza A. Dutcher, Minnie C. George, Austin A. Dutchcr, William S.. Timberlake, and Jennie E. Timberlake, as partners under the name of E. R. George, and, as such partners, engaged in carrying on the Metropolitan Hotel in the city of St. Paul.

An appeal by tbe defendants in this action, other than Timberlake, from an order of the district court for Bamsey count}', refusing them a new new trial in this action, is reported as the last preceding case. The present appeal is taken by plaintiff from a judgment of dismissal in favor of defendant Timberlake, entered pursuant to an order made by Brill, J., at the trial, and is therefore reportéd in this place, in advance of its regular order.

Plaintiff, in his complaint, alleges that, on September 10, 1875, Joseph Campbell, the original patentee of certain -described, land in McLeod comity, and being of lawful age, conveyed the same in fee, for a valuable consideration, to the plaintiff, by deed bearing date on that day, and duly recorded on September 13, 1875; that the defendant fraudulently and wrongfully procured, and caused to he recorded on July 29, 1872, a pretended deed of the same land, purporting to have…

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Ramsey county, Simons, J., presiding, overruling a demurrer to the complaint.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Washington county, Grosby, J., presiding, refusing a new trial. A former appeal in the action is reported, 22 Minn. 118.

<p>Appeal by plaintiffs from a judgment of the district court for Winona county.</p>

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Ramsey county, Brill, J., presiding, sustaining a demurrer to the complaint.

<p>Habeas corpas. Tbe case is stated in tbe opinion.</p>

Appeal by R. J. Marvin from an order of the district court for Ramsey county, Simons, J., presiding, denying his application to be substituted, as administrator, as plaintiff in this action.

Alternative writ of mandamus, issued out of this court,, and directed to the supervisors and town clerk of the town of Clark, in the county of Faribault. The constitutional amendment of November 5, 1872,. (which is quoted at length in the opinion,) abrogated the law by which the issue of bonds by defendant, in excess of' $15,000, was authorized.

Appeal by defendants from an order of the district court for Dakota county, L. M. Brown, J., presiding, (sitting for the judge of the first district,) refusing a new trial, after verdict for plaintiff. A former appeal in the same action is reported, 22 Minn. 5.

This action was brought on March 25, 1876, in the district court for Winona county, against William H. Dill, Felix 'Brennan, J. F. Tourtelotte, Edward Gilmore, and Margaret Gilmore, his wife.

This action was brought in the district court for Ramsey county. A demurrer to the complaint, as not stating a cause of action, was sustained by Wilkin, J., on the ground that the complaint failed to aver that the company had authorized or directed the issue of the preferred stock for which the defendant subscribed.

This action was brought in the district court for Ramsey county, on August 17, 1874, against the defendant Davidson, mortgagee in a mortgage of the undivided half of certain real estate in the city of St. Paul, executed by plaintiff'; the defendant Israel G-.

Proceeding in the district court for Le Sueur county, wherein plaintiff sought to contest the election of defendant as register of deeds of that county. The defendant moved that the proceeding be dismissed, for the reason that no notice of appeal from the board of county canvassers was entered with the clerk of such court within twenty days from the day of the election. The motion was granted by L. M. Brown, J., and plaintiff appealed.

Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the court of common pleas of Hennepin county, entered pursuant to an order of Young, J., made at the trial, dismissing the case for failure of the complaint to state a cause of action.

This action ivas brought in the district court for Nobles county, to foreclose the equities of the defendant under the bond mentioned below, and to have such bond surrendered and cancelled, and for general relief, and was tried before Dickinson, J., whose findings of fact, upon the issues made by the pleadings, were, in substance, as follows : In August, 1873, the defendant made a written contract with the Sioux City & St. Paul Railroad Company for the purchase from it of a…

<p>Appeal by defendants from a judgment of the district court for Nobles county, Dickinson, J., presiding.</p>

Appeal by defendant from an order of the court of common pleas of Ramsey county, entered pursuant to a decision of Simons, J., granting a now trial.

This action was brought in the district court for Wabasha county, to recover for injuries alleged to have been sustained by plaintiff’s minor child from an indecent assault committed upon her by the defendant. At the trial before Mitchell, J., the plaintiff had a verdict for $1,000; a new trial was refused, and defendant appealed.

•Certain lots of the defendant, in the city of St. Paul, were assessed by the proper municipal officers for benefits conferred on them by the grading of Second street from Wabasha to Jackson street, in that city, and, on nonpayment by -defendant, the city treasurer applied to the •district court for Ramsey county for judgment against such lots for the amount of the assessment.

Plaintiff brought this action in the court of common pleas •of Ramsey county, against John Parker, as endorser of a promissory note, and summoned, as garnishees, Henry T. Welles, William W. Eastman, and John Martin, as trustees and assignees of W. D. Washburn, under a general assignment for the benefit of his creditors. The plaintiff, having •obtained judgment against Parker, moved for judgment against the garnishees upon the disclosure set forth in the opinion.

Action on a policy of insurance whereby the defendant, in consideration that plaintiff had bound herself to abide by the charter and by-laws of defendant, and had paid $1.25, insured the plaintiff for seven years, from January 18, 1875, in the sum of $1,150, against loss or damage by fire, the amount of insurance being apportioned in the policy as follows : On dwelling-house, $150; on household furniture therein, $50; on carriages, etc., $135; on farming implements, $80; on…

Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the municipal court of tbe city of Minneapolis.

Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the court of common pleas of Ramsey county, where the action was tried before Brill, J., who directed a verdict for defendant.

By lease under seal the plaintiff demised to defendants a «dwelling-house in St. Paul, for the term of one year from June 1, 1874, at the rent of $40 per month, which the defendants covenanted to pay monthly, in advance.

Action of trespass for entering on plaintiff’s land, breaking down and destroying his fences, ploughing up and destroying his crops, digging ditches, and throwing up an embankment and roadway thereon, to plaintiff’s damage in the sum of $500.

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Sibley county, L. M. Brown, J., presiding, opening a judgment entered on default, and permitting the defendant to answer. At the hearing of the motion the. plaintiff’s attorney appeared specially and objected to the hearing of the motion, on the ground that the motion papers were served upon him, and not upon the plaintiff, and that, at the time of service, he was not the attorney for the plaintiff.

Appeal by defendants from an order of the district court for Mower county, Page, J., presiding, denying their motion to dismiss the action for want of jurisdiction.

Mandamus to compel the execution and delivery to plaintiff of interest-bearing bonds of the town of Lime, to the amount of $7,500.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the court of common pleas of Hennepin county, Young, J., presiding, refusing a new trial.

Appeal by defendants from an order of the district court for Scott county, Crosby, J., presiding, (sitting for the-judge of the eighth district,) overruling a demurrer to the-'complaint.

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Sibley county, L. M. Brown, J., presiding, granting the: motion of defendant Frederick P. Clark, to vacate a judgment obtained by plaintiff, on default, against Frederick P- and Patrick Clark.

Appeal by plaintiff (a corporation) from an order of the district court for Faribault county, Dickinson, J., presiding, refusing; a new trial. A former appeal is reported, 22 Minn. 283.

Defendant was tried and convicted, in the municipal court of the city of Minneapolis, on a complaint for assault and battery. At the trial the defendant excepted to the ruling of the court refusing to permit him to close the argument to the jury. For this alleged error, and on the ground that the verdict was against evidence, and on affidavits of newly-discovered evidence, the defendant moved for a new trial, which was denied, and he appealed to this, court.

This action was brought in the court of common pleas of Hennepin county, against Frank Day and J. H. Murphy, defendants, and S. D. Todd and C. D. Haven, copartners as Todd & Haven, were summoned as garnishees. The appeal is. taken by the garnishees from the judgment entered against them on their disclosure, pursuant to order of Young, J.

<p>Illegal Sale of liquors — Guilty Knowledge. — In a prosecution under Gen. St. c. 16, $ 11, as amended, upon a charge of furnishing “ one glass of spirituous liquor, to wit, whiskey,” to 0., an habitual drunkard, it is not necessary to prove that the liquor furnished was whiskey, nor that the defendant knew that 0. was an habitual drunkard.</p>

This act was brought, in the district court for Sibley county, agaiust the defendant Young, as principal, and the defendants Lorenz Wolf, Louis Cramer, and Thomas Welch, as sureties, upon the official bond of the defendant Young, as county treasurer of that county.

<p>Divorce — Adultery—Alimony.—-In an action for divorce, upon any other ground than that of adultery, the adultery of the plaintiff is not a bar to the action. But if plaintiff, in her complaint, claims alimony, her adultery may be pleaded and proved as a defence, in whole or in part, to that claim.</p>

Action between partners, brought in the court of common ■pleas of Ramsey county, for a dissolution of the partnership, an accounting, the appointment of a receiver, etc. Pending the suit, a receiver was appointed, by whom the partnership affairs were wound up. The action was tried before Brill, J., whose findings, so ■far as objected to, are stated in the opinion, and who ordered judgment for defendant for a balance found due to him from plaintiff.

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the court of common pleas of Ramsey county, refusing a now trial after a trial before Brill, J., and a jury.

<p>'Criminal Trial — Election by Prosecution where more than one Offence is Proved.— "Where, upon the trial of an indictment, in which the time alleged for the commission of the offence is not material, the evidence tends to prove an offence committed on a day other than that alleged in the indictment, and a precisely similar offence committed on the day alleged in the indictment, the state may elect for which it will proceed.</p> <p>Same — Motion to Strike '"Out Evidence. — If a party does not object to evidence offered, it is discretionary with the trial court to grant or refuse his motion, ■after it is received, to strike it out, upon an objection which was apparent to him, and which he might have made, when the evidence was offered.</p>

<p>Motions in District Court — What Affidavits may be Read — Continuance to Procure Affidavits. — On motions in the district court, what affidavits may be read, and in what order, and whether a continuance shall be granted to give a party opportunity to procure further proof, are matters of practice, in the discretion of the court, and this court will not review its action, unless it is evident that the party complaining has not been allowed a reasonable opportunity to be heard.</p>