Volume 32 — Minnesota Reports

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Ramsey county, refusing a new trial, after a trial before Wilkin, -J., and a jury, and a verdict of $3,000 for plaintiff.

Plaintiff, claiming to be the owner of certain land in Gass county, brought this action in the district court for the counties of Crow Wing, Gass, Itasca and Aitkin, to recover the value of 2,160,000 feet of pine timber cut and taken away from such land by the defendants. The defendant Jones admitted the cutting and taking away of the timber, and pleaded title in himself to both the land and timber.

This was a summary proceeding under Gen. Si 1878, c. 84, § 11, brought by plaintiff, as landlord, in the municipal court of St. Paul, on September 25, 1880, for the restitution of lots 1 and 2, in block 12, of Rice & Irvine’s addition, in that city, alleged to be wrongfully detained by defendants John W. Bond, and Joanna H. his wife, after the expiration of the term of their lease.

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

Plaintiff orought this action in July, 1879, in the district court for Eamsey county against her mother Susan L. Thompson and her uncle Horace Thompson, who had been her guardians, to set aside a settlement and a transfer of property made by her to the former lé months after she became of age, and for an accounting.

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

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Fillmore county, Farmer, J., presiding, refusing a new trial after a verdict of 99 cents for defendant on the counterclaim pleaded in her answer.

Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Stevens county, to recover the value of certain wheat and oats taken and carried away by defendants from the farm of one Dahlso, and by them converted to their own use.

This action being at issue, and having been called for trial by jury in the district court for Steele county, and a jury having been sworn to try the cause, the defendant failed to appear, his answer was withdrawn, and the jury, under the direction of the court, returned a verdict for plaintiff for $389.86. The plaintiff (a corporation) in its bill of costs included items of fees and mileage of witnesses at the.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Lochren, J., presiding, refusing a new trial after verdict of $1,000 for plaintiff.

Creditors’ petition in insolvency, in tbe district court for Ramsey county.

This action was brought in the district court for Eamsey county, and on March 11,1884, a garnishee summons was issued and served on James A. Owens. On March 15, 1884, judgment was entered against the defendant Mann, and on March 20, 1884, the garnishee disclosed that he held the property of Mann under the assignment involved in the last preceding case. The plaintiffs appeal from an order of Simons, J., discharging the garnishee.

On January 22, 1884, one Smith brought suit against defendant Meachem, in the municipal court of Minneapolis, and summoned the Hennepin County Savings Bank as garnishee. On the next day, Meachem executed to Joseph D. Darling an assignment purporting to be made under the insolvent law of 1881.

Action brought in the district court for Bice county, upon a guaranty signed by the partnership name of defendants, (Greaves and Van Campen,) and indorsed upon and delivered with a. promissory note made by one Hustis to the plaintiffs, on March 12, 1878.

Action, brought in the district court for Wright county, to determine defendant’s adverse claims to certain vacant land in that county. Plaintiff’s claim of title was founded on a tax judgment and sale in 1876 for the taxes of 1875. The action was tried by Koon, J., who held the judgment and sale valid and ordered judgment for plaintiff, which was entered, and the defendant appealed.

Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Polk county to recover the value of a quantity of wines, liquors and cigars, which he alleged were his property and had been taken from his possession and converted by defendant.

Plaintiffs brought this action in the district court for Washington county to recover the value of their services in driving logs.

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

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Dodge county, Buckham, J., presiding, overruling his general demurrer to the complaint.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court for Hennepin county, Young, J., presiding. The case is stated in the opinion. A former appeal is reported in 29 Minn. 418.

Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for McLeod county, alleging in his complaint the recovery, on April 25, 1882, of a judgment in justice court in the same county, in favor of one Albrecht and against defendant A. Schisselbauer, for $66.55, the cause of action being a promissory note made by him; the issuing and return unsatisfied of an execution from the justice court; the subsequent docketing of the judgment in the district court for the same county on…

Plaintiff brought this action in justice court in Waseca county, for the killing of a hog by one of defendant’s trains, at a point where defendant had failed to fence its right of way. Plaintiff recovered judgment, and the defendant appealed, on questions of law alone, to the district court, where the appeal was heard by Buckham, J., and the judgment of the justice affirmed. Defendant appeals from the judgment of the district court.

Plaintiff brought this action on February 9, 1882, in the district court for Scott county, to restrain the foreclosure by advertisement of a real-estate mortgage, and for the cancellation of the mortgage and the mortgage notes.

Appeal by plaintiff, as executrix of E. A. C. Hatch, deceased, from •a judgment entered on the pleadings in the district court for Bamsey county, Brill, J., presiding. The former action mentioned in the pleadings and opinion is Hatch v. Coddington, 95 U. S. 48.

<p>Condemnation Proceeding.</p> <p>Appeal by the railroad comiiany from a judgment of the district court for Polk county, Stearns, J., presiding:</p>

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Washington county, Crosby, J., presiding, refusing a new trial, after verdict in his favor of $1.

Appeal by defendants from an order of the district court for Becker county, Stearns, J., presiding, refusing a new trial.

After the decision on the former appeal (reported 31 Minn. 48, where the contract is set out and the case fully stated) the action was retried in the district court for Hennepin county, before Lochren, J. The defendant objected and excepted to the admission of evidence of the cost of the house built on the land by plaintiffs, as required by the contract, and to the refusal of the court to instruct the jury that, under the pleadings, they could only find a verdict for…

Plaintiff, county assessor of Ramsey county, brought this action in the district court for that county, to recover sums paid by him for services of duly appointed, qualified and acting assistant assessors, amounting to $9,453. These payments were made by him voluntarily, and in the belief that he was legally bound to make them. Afterwards he obtained assignments of the claims of such assistants against the county for their services.

Plaintiff brought this action in April, 1883, in the district court for Otter Tail county, against Henry G. Page, Henry Opperman, John W. Corliss and others, (claiming under defendant Page,) praying (among other things) that an assignment of a sheriff’s certificate of mortgage sale by Opperman to Corliss, bearing date March 13, 1875, be declared a mortgage, and for leave to redeem; and that a judgment in a suit brought by defendant Page against Opperman and others be…

The defendant was tried in the district court for Ramsey county, before Wilkin, J.,upon an indictment for the murder of one William Johnson. The principal defence was that the killing was in self-defence. The trial began on February 19, 1883, and was continued from day to day, the ease being submitted to the jury on the 22nd, and a verdict of guilty of manslaughter in the second degree returned on the 23rd.

Appeal by the defendants, Young, E. E. Fairchild, (his assignee,} the First National Bank of Hasson, and John Fern, from an order of the district court for Dodge county, Buckham, J., presiding, overruling their demurrers to the complaint. To the statement of the substance of the complaint in the opinion, it may be added that the complaint alleges the assignment from Young to Fern to have been made under and pursuant to the provisions of Gen. St. 1878, c. á 1, § 23.

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

<p>Appeal, in each case, by the plaintiff from a judgment of the district court for Hennepin county, Young, J., presiding.</p>

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Scott county, Macdonald, J., presiding, vacating and setting aside the defendant’s demand for “another trial of that part or branch of said action wherein the title and right of possession to the lands described in the complaint in said action are involved.” A former appeal in this action is reported 31 Minn. 106.

<p>Charge to Jury. — The rule that a trial court need not charge the jury in the language of a request, if the propositions contained in it are fully and clearly stated in the general charge, followed.</p> <p>Eailway — Care of Turn-table to prevent Injury to Children. — Where the issue is negligence in the care of and manner of guarding a railroad turn-table, for the purpose of preventing children of tender years, having access to it, being injured, it is competent to prove that the fastenings to it were similar in character to those in general use on such turntables; following Kelly v. Southern Minn. By. Co., 28 Minn. 98.</p> <p>Same — Expert Evidence. — A witness who has been employed in railroad work 25 years, part of the time in charge of a turn-table, is competent to answer the question: “Would it be practicable to lock or fence turntables?”</p>

Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Freeborn county, as holder of the following instrument: “Toionship of Manchester, Feb’y S3, 1881. “$120.

Plaintiff, on March 16,1881, presented to the board of county commissioners of Dakota county his petition for compensation for damages sustained through the negligence of one Kranz, register of deeds of the county, in furnishing an erroneous abstract of title, in 1872, to lots 4 and 5, block 63, in West St. Paul, then in Dakota county. This action of plaintiff was pursuant to Sp.

Levi Gragg (whose residence is not disclosed by the record) died intestate in 1868, seized in fee of real estate in Dakota county, and leaving a widow and several children.

<p>Indictment — -Failure to arraign Defendant — Dismissal.—Several indictments, charging a defendant with similar offences, having been found at one term of the court, the neglect of the state, during three succeeding terms, to arraign the defendant upon one of such indictments, is not excused by facts which had led to the continuance of trial upon the other indictments during the intervening time. The defendant should have been arraigned upon all indictments found against him.</p>

Petition for a writ of certiorari to the mayor, city clerk and city council of Minneapolis, to review the ordinance and proceedings by which it was attempted to establish “patrol districts,” outside of which no licenses to sell liquor should be granted, and' under color whereof the petitioner’s application for a license was denied. The case is stated in the opinion.

Action under Gen. St. 1878, c. 75, § 2, to determine adverse claims to vacant and unoccupied real property, the defendants, in their several answers, denying .plaintiff’s title, and each alleging title in himself to a part of the land; the defendant Engerud asking judgment that plaintiff take nothing by the action, and for costs; and the defendant Matilda Shilloek asking judgment that plaintiff have no interest in the property, that her title be confirmed as against…

On February 28,1880, Charles H. Woods was, by the probate court of Hennepin county, appointed guardian of Lyman N. Hause, a spendthrift. On August 27, 1883, he filed his final account, showing $1,544.69 received and $1,569.81 expended, with a petition for its allowance. The petition was ordered to be heard September 24, 1883, and a citation to all persons interested was ordered to be served by two weeks’ publication.

Appeal by defendants from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, refusing a new trial, after a trial before Koon, J., without a jury.

This action arose out of matters connected with the estate of D. A. Huntsman, deceased, mentioned in the foregoing ease of Balch v. Hooper, ante, p. 158. The resignation of defendant Hooper as administrator of the estate was accepted by the probate court of Scott county and his final account adjusted as stated in Balch v. Hooper.

Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Otter Tail county, to recover damages for a breach of warranty7 alleged to have been made by defendant (a corporation) upon a sale of a binder. The action was tried before Collins, J., and a jury, and plaintiff had a verdict. Defendant appeals from an order refusing a new trial.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Big Stone county, Brown, J., presiding, refusing a new trial. cited 2 Pomeroy Eq. Jur. §§ 901, 906; Bigelow on Fraud, 31; Dambmann v. Schulte, 75 N. Y. 55; 1 Story Eq. Jur. § 207; Van Arsdale v. Howard, 5 Ala. 596; 2 Parsons on Cont. 366; Bell v. Ellis, 33 Cal. 620; Lupin v. Marie, 6 Wend. 77, 83; Smith v. Smith, 21 Pa. St. 367; Backentoss v. Speicher, 31 Pa.

After the decision in Kanne v. Minn, é St. Louis By. Co., 30 Minn. 423, the railway company, on September 3, 1883, moved, in the district court for Waseca county, for judgment condemning to its use the land of Kanne involved in that suit, pursuant to an award of commissioners filed June 18,1877. The motion was denied by Buck-ham, J., and the company appealed.

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

<p>St. Paul — -Street Paving. — The charter of the city of St. Paul authorizes the board of public works to contract for the partial paving of a street.</p> <p>Same — Omission to Assess Street Railway Co. — A street railway company having a double track in a street, and neither the spaces between the rails nor the spaces between the tracks being paved or contracted to be, held, that the board of public works might fairly be of opinion that the company was not benefited by the paving of the rest of the street, and therefore properly refrain from assessing the company towards the expense thereof.</p> <p>Same — Execution of Contracts — -Signature of Comptroller. — Section 28, title 1, chapter 7, of the charter, as amended by Sp. Law's 1875, c. 1, § 9, provides that contracts for grading, paving, etc., shall be made on the part of the board of public works in the name of the city of St. Paul, and shall be executed on the part of the city by the president of the board, or such of their members as the board may designate, and the seal of the board shall be thereto attached, and “the said contract shall be countersigned by the city comptroller.” Held, that when, upon a proper state of facts, a contract is executed by the contractor with such guaranty as may be required, and by the president of the board of public works as directed, it is complete as a valid contract between the city and the contractor.</p> <p>Same — Compelling Signature. — In such ease, as the comptroller can have no discretion in the premises, his countersigning can be nothing more than a clerical duty, the performance of which can be compelled by the contractor or board.</p> <p>Same — Signature after Performance of Contract. — In such circumstances the failure of the comptroller to countersign until after the performance of the work contracted for, but before the commencement of the proceedings to assess, would be nothing more than a “formal irregularity or defect, ” such as may be disregarded by the district court, under the provision of section 39, title 1, chapter 7, of the city charter.</p>

Plaintiff, as assignee of one Heffernan, brought this action in September, 1882, in the district court for Winona county, alleging that in July, 1874, Heffernan, being owner of a certain note for $1,000, secured by mortgage on real estate in that county, assigned both note and mortgage to defendant Briggs, upon an agreement that he should pay Heffernan whatever he could collect or realize on the note and mortgage as soon as collected or realized; that in March, 1875,…

After the decision in Nash v. Sullivan, 29 Minn. 206, final judgment in ejectment was entered in favor of plaintiff in that action, a,nrl thereupon he brought this action in the district court for Polk county, to recover the value of the wheat raised by defendant during the years 1880 and 18S1 upon the land involved in the former action.

Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Becker county, to recover for the conversion of wheat, of which plaintiff claimed to be the owner. The action was tried by Stearns, J., without a jury, and judgment ordered for plaintiff. Defendant appeals from an or■der refusing a new trial.

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Eamsey county, Brill, J., presiding, refusing a new trial, the action having been dismissed by the court upon the trial when the plaintiff rested.

Plaintiff appeals from an order of the district court for Ramsey county, Wilkin, J., presiding, sustaining a demurrer to the complaint. cited Weaver v. Miss. & R. R. Boom Co., 28 Minn. 534; Wilmes v. Minn. & N. W. Ry.

Action to determine adverse claims to real estate situated in Renville county, brought in the district court for that county. Defendant pleaded title under a foreclosure by advertisement of a mortgage upon lands in both Renville and McLeod counties, the sale having been made in the latter county. The mortgage was properly recorded in Renville county, but the record of it in McLeod county failed to include the land in Renville county.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, refusing a new trial, after a trial before Koon, J., and a jury. A former appeal is reported, 30 Minn. 493.

Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Hennepin county, to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by the negligence of defendant in the management of its ears. The action was tried before Koon, J., and a jury, and plaintiff had a general verdict for $8,000. Defendant appeals from an order refusing a new trial.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the municipal court of Minneapolis, refusing a new trial, in an action to recover for services rendered in driving logs belonging to defendant.

Action for libel, brought in the district court for Hennepin county, and tried before Lochren, J., and a jury. Plaintiff had a verdict for $5,000, and appeals from an order granting a new trial upon the ground that the damages awarded were excessive. The alleged libel will be found at length in the report of a decision of this court, in 30 Minn. 41, upon a former appeal in this action.

Proceedings instituted by tbe Minneapolis Union Railway Company to condemn for railway purposes a leasehold interest in certain lots in the city of Minneapolis, owned by Laraway & King, the respondents in this appeal. The award of the commissioners having been made and filed, Laraway & King appealed therefrom to the district-court for Hennepin county, where a trial was had before Koon, J., and a jury, who assessed the damages at $33,000.

Ejectment. Defendant appeals from an order of the district court-for Hennepin county, Koon, J., presiding, refusing a new trial, after a. verdict for plaintiff under the direction of the court.

Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Hennepin county, to recover for personal injuries received by him, as brakeman in the employment of defendant, in coupling a car and locomotive tender. At the trial before Lochren, J., and a jury the plaintiff had a verdict for $10,500. Defendant appeals from an order refusing a new trial. The case is stated in the opinion.

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

Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Clay county, to recover for the alleged conversion by defendants of a stock of hardware. The answer denies plaintiff’s ownership, and justifies the taking of the goods under writs of attachment against one George Garver. Plaintiff’s title is based upon an alleged transfer from George Garver, claimed to have been made prior to the levy of the writs of attachment.

Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Stearns county* to recover the value of his services as a physician, rendered in attendance upon defendant’s wife. The answer denied the value of the services, and pleaded a counterclaim for damages arising from plaintiff’s malpractice and negligence. The action was tried before Collins, J., and a jury, and plaintiff had a verdict. Defendant appeals from an order refusing a new trial.

This action was brought in the district court for Mower county, to recover damages alleged to have been caused by the negligence of defendant in failing to keep its sewers in repair. The action was tried before Farmer, J., and a jury, and plaintiff had a verdict for $78.92. Defendant appeals from an order refusing a new trial.

This action Vas brought in the district court for Scott county, to recover the value of hay cut by the defendants upon the premises of plaintiff. The defendants had entered upon the land and cut the hay under a bona fid,e claim of title. The action was tried before Macclonalcl, J., and a jury, who brought in a general verdict for plaintiff for $-3-80.75.

Action brought in the district court for Waseca county, to “recover damages for personal injuries received by.plaintiff while a passenger in a car of defendant which was derailed. At the trial before Buck-ham, J., and a jury, the defendant had a verdict.

Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the district court for Wabasha county, where the action was tried by Start, J., and a jury, verdict rendered for defendants, and a motion for a new trial denied.

Plaintiffs brought this action in the district court for Fillmore county, against defendant Lombard, to recover possession of a portable steam-engine. The defendant in his answer pleaded title in Seymour, Sabin & Co., (a corporation,) and his own possession as its-agent.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Koon, J., presiding, overruling a demurrer to the complaint. The contract is sufficient to satisfy the statute of frauds. Evidence may be resorted to in order to identify the property. The location and identification of the land may be established by parol.

Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Hennepin county, to recover damages for personal injuries occasioned by the negligence of the defendants in leaving in an exposed and dangerous condition an area or opening under a sidewalk. The defendants made default, and the plaintiff’s damages were assessed, under direction of the court, at $3,000.

Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Ramsey county, to recover $4,000 damages for an alleged breach of contract.

Appeal by defendant Menard (impleaded with Medare Miller) from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Young, J., presiding, refusing a new trial, in an action to enforce a mechanic’s lien.

Mandamus. Sp. Laws 1883, c. 3, § 8, approved February 27, 1883, and which is amendatory of the charter of the city of Minneapolis, provides that “each alderman shall be entitled to an annual salary of $300, and in addition thereto, members of the board of equalization of taxes, and aldermen acting as judges of election, may be given compensation for such special services.” Prior to the passage of this act, the charter provided (Sp.

Plaintiffs brought this action in the district court for Mille Lacs county, to recover damages occasioned by the allowance and service of a writ of injunction in a former action brought by defendants against plaintiffs, [Keith v. Hayclen, 26 Minn. 212.) On the trial, before Collins, J., and a jury, when the plaintiffs rested their case, the court dismissed the action, upon the ground that there was no evidence tending to show that the application for the writ of injunction…

Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Ramsey county to restrain the defendant from quarrying and removing rock and stone from the street in front of certain lots owned by plaintiff. The defendant appeals from an order by Simons, J., refusing to dissolve a temporary injunction.

Plaintiff, who is a large stockholder of the Saint Croix Boom Corporation, brought this action in the district court for Washington county, to restrain the defendants, who are stockholders in the same company, from passing any resolution, or doing any other act or thing, signifying the acceptance by the corporation of the amendment to its charter contained in Sp.

Action upon a promissory note, brought in the district court for Eillmore county. Defendant pleaded, as a defence and counterclaim, a breach of warranty alleged to have been made by plaintiffs upon the sale to defendant of a Tiger Threshing-machine Separator, for a. part of the purchase price of which the note in suit was given.

Appeal by defendants from a judgment for restitution in the municipal court .of Minneapolis, where the action was tried by the court without a jury.

Action to foreclose a mortgage, made by defendants M. B. Farrell and Margaret Farrell, his wife, brought in the district court for Ramsey county. The notes to secure which the mortgage was given were made by the defendant M. B Farrell alone.

This action was brought in the district court for Ramsey county, to recover three per cent, of defendant’s gross earnings, during the year 1881, derived from its operation of the line of railroad between St. Paul and St. Cloud, owned by the St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co., and over which the defendant ran its trains by virtue of the contract between the companies stated in the opinion.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Wabasha county, refusing a new trial, after trial by Start., J, a jury being waived.

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

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

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Bamsey county, Brill, J., presiding, refusing to dissolve a temporary writ of injunction, issued upon complaint, which was verified by the oath of two of the plaintiffs, each saying “that he knows the contents of the foregoing and attached complaint, and that the said complaint is true.” The motion to dissolve was made upon-a similarly verified answer, and was opposed by a verified reply and by affidavit.

<p>Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the municipal court of Minneapolis, refusing a new trial.</p>

Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the district court for Hennepin county, Koon, J., presiding. The judgment was rendered on the pleadings, which are stated in the opinion. The doctrine of Callender v. Marsh, 1 Pick. 418, and Radcliff v. Brooklyn, 4 N. Y. 195, has not been followed in this state, and is inconsistent with O’Brien v. City of St. Paul, 25 Minn. 331; Dyer v. City of St. Paul, 27 Minn. 457.

Appeal by the relator from an order of the district court for Bam■sey county, Simons, L, presiding, quashing an alternative writ of mandamus. The case made by the pleadings is stated in the opinion.

<p>.St. Paul — Ordinance restricting Sale of Vegetables. — A general prohibition, by ordinance of the city of St. Paul, of the sale of vegetables and farm products, except by licensed vendors, is not authorized by a legislative act empowering the passage of an ordinance prohibiting such sales “during market hours.”</p>

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Bamsey County, Simons, J., presiding, refusing a new trial, after a verdict ■of $5,000 for plaintiff. The action was brought, under the statute, for damages for injuries causing the death of plaintiff’s intestate.

Cadwallader C. Washburn, of La Crosse, Wisconsin, died May 14, 1882, having made his last will on December 13, 1881, in which he named the respondents Gysbert Yan Steenwyk, Charles Payson and Charles J. Martin as his executors.

Appeal by defendants from an order of. the district court for Waseca county, Buckham, J., presiding, overruling their demurrer to the complaint. The action was to enforce a mechanic’s lien, under Gen. St. 1878, c. 90, § 2, for materials furnished by plaintiffs to one Berndt for- use and used by him in a building he was erecting on land of defendant Moonan, under a contract with that defendant.

<p>Mankato City Charter — Auctioneer’s License — Police Regulation.— The charter of the city of Mankato does not authorize the city council to exact a license fee of auctioneers for the purposes of revenue, but only as a police regulation.</p> <p>Same — License Fee Unreasonable. — Upon the facts found in this ease, a license fee of $300 held unreasonable as a police regulation, and unauthorized as a tax.</p>

Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the district court for Hennepin county, entered on the report of Hon. John M. Shaw, referee.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Rice* county, Backham, J., presiding, refusing a new trial after a trial by the court without a jury.

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Young, J., presiding, sustaining a general demurrer to the complaint. The action was brought to recover tolls, at the rate fixed by the commissioners of Mille Lacs county, under Sp. Laws 1881, c. 222, on logs of defendants floated by means of plaintiff’s sluice-dam.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Mower county, Farmer, J., presiding, refusing a new trial, a verdict for plaintiff having been directed by the court. The case is stated in the opinion. It is only by comity that the Iowa law making the record of a chattel mortgage with the recorder of the county equivalent to change of possession, and giving it ten years’ life, can in any way affect the property after it comes,into this state.

Appeal by James A. Lovejoy, as claimant in an action against Joseph WT. Ladd, defendant, and the Shoe & Leather Ins. Co., garnishee, from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Koon, J., presiding, refusing a new trial after verdict for plaintiff.

The administrator of Louisa J. Besondy, who died in May, 1874, filed in the probate court of Olmsted county, on May 15, 1882, an account of money received by his intestate as guardian of her son, John W. Perry, the account showing no expenditures. The guardian having died insolvent, the surety on her bond was admitted as a party to the accounting.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court for Ramsey county, where plaintiff had a verdict for $5,000, and a motion for a new trial was denied by Wilkin and Brill, JJ.

Appeal by defendants from an order of the district court for Ramsey county, Wilkin, J., presiding, refusing a new trial, after conviction upon an indictment for robbery. The case is stated in the opinion. The court erred in admitting -evidence of the statements made by the prosecuting witness.

Action to recover damages for personal injuries, brought in the district court for Otter Tail county. At the trial before Collins, J., plaintiff had a verdict for $8,272.55. The defendant appeals from an order refusing a new trial.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Koon, J., presiding, refusing a new trial, after a verdict of $1,800 for plaintiff.

Order to show cause. The defendants appealed from an order of the district court for Bamsey county, Brill, J., presiding, setting aside the clerk’s taxation of costs.

This action was brought in the district court for Mower county, to have a certain mortgage made to defendants declared satisfied, and discharged of record, and to restrain foreclosure by defendants. The complaint alleged that the mortgage was given as collateral security to certain book-accounts, which had been fully paid.

The plaintiffs, who are owners of pine lands upon the St. Louis river and its tributaries above Knife Falls, brought this action in the district court for Carlton county, against the Knife Falls Boom Corporation and the St. Louis River Boom & Improvement Company, to restrain the defendants from hindering or delaying the passage of plaintiffs’ logs down the river, and to require the defendants to remove from the river their piers and structures erected therein, so as to give…

Plaintiff brought this action in the district court'for Freeborn county, to recover damages for the maintenance and continuance by defendant from August 24, 1880, to July 20, 1883, of the excavation and -cut complained of in Brakken v. Minn, é St. L. By. Co., 29 Minn. 41; 31 Minn. 45, and, after a trial before Farmer, J., and a jury, had a verdict for $400 damages. Defendant appeals from an order refusing a new trial.

Action upon a promissory note by the payee against the maker, brought in the district court for Hennepin county. The action was tried before Young, J., and a jury, and plaintiff had a verdict. The defendant appeals from an order refusing a new trial. The court charged the jury that the note was given upon a sufficient consideration. This was error.

This action was brought in the district court for Washington county, for an accounting of the earnings of the steamboat Jennie ITayes, and for a sale of the boat and division of the proceeds. It was admitted by the pleadings that the plaintiff is the owner of an undivided one-third, and the defendant is the owner of the other two-thirds.

The defendant was convicted of the crime of larceny in the municipal court of Minneapolis, on trial by the court without a jury, on January 25,1884. He gave notice of a motion for a new trial, which was heard February 12, 1884. On March 3, 1884, the court filed “findings of fact” and an order refusing a new trial. ' These findings are claimed by defendant not to show facts sufficient to constitute the crime of larceny. The record does not contain the evidence.

On January 19, 1884, an order was made by the district court for Kandiyohi county, Brown, J., presiding, denying defendant’s motion for a new trial in this action. Notice of this order was served upon defendant’s attorney, by mail, on January 26, 1884, and on March 25,1884, notice of appeal by defendant was mailed to plaintiff’s attorney and to the clerk of the district court.

After the decision of a former appeal in this action, which is reported in 31 Minn. 11, a new trial was had in the district court for Freeborn county, before Farmer, J., and a jury, and plaintiff had a verdict for $2,000. Judgment was entered and the defendant appealed.

Action upon a promissory note, brought in the district court for McLeod county. The answer alleged that the note was given to plaintiff in part payment for a span of horses, and pleaded a counterclaim for damages arising from the breach of an alleged warranty of soundness. The reply denied the making of any warranty. The action was tried before Macdonald, J., and a jury.

This action was commenced before a justice of the peace in Redwood county, to recover possession of a carload of wood of the value of $40, and judgment was rendered for defendant. Plaintiff appealed to the district court, where the action was tried before Webber, J., and a jury, and defendant had a verdict. Defendant appeals from an order granting a new trial.

Action in the district court for Douglas and Grant counties, to determine the adverse claims of the defendant to the land in controversy, situate in Grant county. The defendant claims title under a tax judgment and sale referred to in the opinion. The action was tried by Collins, J., without a jury, and judgment ordered for plaintiffs. Defendant appeals from an order refusing a new trial.

An instrument was admitted to probate as the last will of John S. Brown, in the probate court of Le Sueur county, without contest, on June 4,1883. On July 2, 1883, Emily Brown, a daughter of the decedent, (who had not appeared in the probate court) served upon the attorney who had appeared for the executor and proponent in the probate court a notice of appeal to the district court of that county, accompanied by the affidavit recited in the opinion.

Ejectment for a parcel of land in Minneapolis, consisting of contiguous parts of lots 4 and 5, in block 55, and being in area less than either lot.

<p>Eminent Domain — Appeal—Dismissal by Railroad Co. — In proceedings for the condemnation of land for railroad purposes, an award was made by commissioners, from which the railroad company appealed to the district court. The corporation, giving the security required by Gen. St. 1878, c. 34, § 24, took possession of the property as authorized by that section. Afterwards the corporation entered a dismissal of its appeal, and a judgment of dismissal was thereupon entered. Held: 1. The judgment dismissing the appeal was a “final judgment” within the meaning of Gen. St. 1878, a. 34, § 29, as amndeed in 1881, (chapter 57,) and the corporation was required by that statute to pay the award within GO days thereafter.</p> <p>Same — Judgment for Land-owner for Interest on Award. — 2. The corporation having failed to make such payment, the act of 1881 authorized the entry of a judgment, upon motion of the land-owner, adjudging the condemnation proceedings abandoned, and awarding damages to him, computed upon the amount of the award, at the rate of 10 per cent, per annum.</p> <p>Same — Attorney’s Fees. — 3. The including of attorney’s fees in such a judgment was unauthorized.</p>

Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Hennepin county, praying that defendant be adjudged to hold in trust for plaintiff, and to convey to her in fee, as cotenant with himself, one undivided twentieth of certain described real estate in that county, subject only to the payment of her proportion of the sum justly due ujion the redemption of a certain mortgage, which had been foreclosed by advertisement, and the land purchased at the mortgage sale by the…

<p>Contributory Negligence. — Evidence considered, and held, that the question of contributory negligence was for the jury.</p>

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

Action in the district court for- Hennepin county, to determine the-adverse interest of defendants in vacant lots in Minneapolis.. At the-trial, before Lochren, J., without a jury, it appeared that on December 17, 1857, defendant Cobb- was owner in fee of the lots, and on that day mortgaged them to plaintiff, the mortgage containing the usual power of sale and being duly recorded. The plaintiff’s title rests on proceedings for foreclosure- of this mortgage by advertisement.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court for Steele county, Buekham, J., presiding, affirming the judgment of a justice of the peace.

On September 25, 1878, the appellant Brown, guardian of Anna Cora and other minor children of D. A. Huntsman, deceased, filed in the probate court of Scott county a resignation of his guardianship.. 'Thereupon the court made an order that he personally appear on October 1, 1878, and render an account. On that day Brown filed a verified but not itemized statement of account.

The plaintiff, a banking corporation under the laws of the state, brought this action in the district court for Waseca county, to restrain the defendant, the treasurer of the county, from making sale of the shares of stock of the bank for taxes levied thereon. In its complaint it professes to sue on behalf of all its stockholders, and sets forth matters which it alleges vitiated the assessment of the tax.

<p>Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court for Sibley county, Macdonald, J., presiding.</p>

Appeal by plaintiffs from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Young, J., presiding, refusing a new trial.

Appeal by defendants from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Loehren, J., presiding, refusing a new trial.

This action was brought in the district court for Washington county, do recover from defendant, clerk of school-district No. 10 in that county, double the amount ($68.75) of an order drawn by him, July 11, 1882, as clerk, on the district treasurer, and paid by the latter, in favor of -one Alice Elliott, the teacher of the public school in the ■ district during the spring and summer of 1882, who, the complaint alleges, was unlawfully employed as such, having no license to…

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Hennepin' county, Young, J., presiding, refusing a new trial, after a verdict of $2,300, for injuries occasioned by plaintiff’s falling into a ditch or gully in Fifth street, in Minneapolis, between seven and eight o’clock in the evening of October 25, 1883.

<p>Tax Sale — Bedemption, by what Law Governed. — The right of redemption from a tax sale must be governed by the law in force at the date of the sale: it can be neither shortened nor extended by subsequent legislation.</p> <p>Same — Expiration of Period for Bedemption — Notice by Certificate— Holder. — Under Laws 1877, c. 6, § 87, the “redemption period” does not expire, notwithstanding the lapse of three years from the date of sale, until after the service of notice of the amount for which the land was sold, the amount required to redeem, and the time when the redemption period will expire.</p>

After the decision of this court (30 Minn. 528) holding the complaint insufficient, the cause was remanded to the district court for Murray county, and plaintiff served an amended complaint, in substance as follows: The defendant is owner in fee of a described quarter-section of land.

Action to enforce a mechanic’s lien against land and the buildings thereon, belonging to defendant, in the city of St. Paul. The complaint alleges the furnishing of lumber and material by plaintiffs, as-partners, to one Potter, to be used, and which were used, in the house in question, which Potter was then engaged in constructing under a contract with defendant, the owner.

<p>Municipal Court — Decision and Order Filed after Expiration of Term of Office. — -Where the judge of a municipal court, upon the expiration of his term of office, vacated and ceased to occupy the same, but thereafter reduced to writing and filed a decision and order for judgment in a case previously tried and submitted, held, that such decision and order were unauthorized, and a judgment entered thereon might be set aside on motion.</p>

Replevin, in justice court for Redwood county. The replevin affidavit, made October 2,1883, was as follows: [Title, etc.] “C. P. Carlson came before me personally, and, being first duly sworn, doth say that he is said plaintiff in the above-entitled cause; that said plaintiff is entitled to the immediate possession of that certain personal property to recover possession of which this-suit is brought, and which is described as follows, that is to say: Eight cords of mixed…

Appeal by plaintiffs from an order of the district court for Eamsey county, Simons, J., presiding, sustaining a general demurrer to the-complaint.

Action for divorce, brought in the district court for Bamsey county, ■the plaintiff asking also the sole custody of the infant child of the parties. The answer, among other things, charges plaintiff with various acts of misconduct in business transactions, and with making false charges of adultery against defendant, for the purpose of extorting money and property from the person falsely charged to be her paramour.

Appeal by the relator from a judgment of the district court for Hen■iiepin county, Young, Loclvren, and Koon, JJ., presiding, adjudging the relator not entitled to a writ of mandamus to compel the respondent to issue its bonds to the amount of $63,000, pursuant to Sp. Daws 1879, c. 182.

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Benton county, Collins, J., presiding, overruling a demurrer to the answer.

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

Appeal by defendants, the heirs-at-law of Edward W. Johnson, deceased, from an order of the district court for Steele county, Buckham, J., presiding, modifying a decree of distribution in the probate court of that county, from which the plaintiff (widow of the decedent) had appealed on questions of law alone.

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Rice-county, Buokham, L, presiding, overruling a demurrer to the answer.

Plaintiff, the father and administrator of Anton Sckeffler, a child 18 months old, brought this action (under Gen. St. 1878, c. 77, § 2) to recover $5,000 damages sustained by the next of kin of the intestate, in consequence of his death, which was caused, as alleged in the com- - plaint, by the defendant’s negligence. A former action by the same plaintiff for his damages by reason of the loss of his child’s services is reported supra, p. 125.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Scott county, Macdonald, J., presiding, denying his motion for judgment.

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Young, J., presiding, refusing a new trial.

<p>Eailroad —Negligence — Fire caused by Locomotive. — The circumstances of the origin and spread of a fire which destroyed plaintiff’s property, as disclosed by his evidence in this case, held sufficient to support a finding by the jury that it was caused by one of defendant’s locomotive engines.</p> <p>Same — Evidence—Question for Jury. — Held, also, that the evidence offered by defendant to rebut the presumption of negligence on its part, raised by plaintiff’s evidence under the statute, was not conclusive, but its sufficiency was for the jury to consider.</p>

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Freeborn county, Farmer, J., presiding, refusing a new trial. relied on Wheeler v. Merriman, 30 Minn. 372.

Appeal by plaintiffs from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Young, J., presiding, refusing a new trial after a verdict by which the jury found that James A. Lovejoy, the claimant, was entitled to recover from the Equitable Fire Insurance Company, the garnishee, the insurance money in dispute. cited North Star Boot & Shoe Go. v. Ladd, ante, p. 381.

The plaintiff presented to the .board of county commissioners of' Le Sueur county a bill of many items of expense incurred for food,, medical attendance, etc., furnished by plaintiff’s supervisors, acting as a board of health, to 12 residents of the town who were infected with small-pox, and none of whom nor their relatives were able to pay any part of the expense incurred.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Stearns county, Cóllins, J., presiding, setting aside the report of a referee, and granting a new trial.

Appeal by plaintiffs from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Lochren, J., presiding, refusing a new trial. The action was to establish and enforce a mechanics’ lien in favor of plaintiffs for materials furnished by them to defendants Hanson & Goldsborougli for use, and which were used by the latter in building a dwelling-house on land of defendant Gold, under a contract with her.

<p>Case certified from the district court for Eenville county, Webber, J., presiding.</p>

The cause was heard upon the return of the judges to the order to show cause, which return was adopted by the parties instituting the proceeding sought to be restrained.

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Morrison county, Collins, J., presiding, refusing a new trial.

<p>Appeal by defendants from an order of the district court for Ramsey county, Brill, J., presiding, refusing a new trial.</p>