Albrecht v. City of St. Paul

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Albrecht v. City of St. Paul

57 N.W. 330, 56 Minn. 99, 1894 Minn. LEXIS 9

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedJanuary 2, 1894

DocketNo. 8523

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 57 N.W. 330 (Albrecht v. City of St. Paul) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Albrecht v. City of St. Paul, 57 N.W. 330, 56 Minn. 99, 1894 Minn. LEXIS 9 (Mich. 1894).

Pincite

Opinion

Collins, J.

Plaintiffs’ first assignment of error is not only too general to indicate in what particular the finding of fact complained of is erroneous, but it covers many facts which were not only alleged in the complaint, but, after being set out with much detail in the answer, were expressly admitted in the reply. It does not reach that part of the findings of fact attacked in appellants’ brief whereby the court found that the allegations of the complaint respecting the real character and purpose of the improvements, and that they were actually made for a private, and not a public, use, were untrue. If the findings of fact remain intact, it follows that there is nothing in the second assignment of error as to the conclusions of law.

Judgment affirmed.

(Opinion published 57 N. "W. Rep. 330.)

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Collins, J.

Plaintiffs’ first assignment of error is not only too general to indicate in what particular the finding of fact complained of is erroneous, but it covers many facts which were not only alleged in the complaint, but, after being set out with much detail in the answer, were expressly admitted in the reply. It does not reach that part of the findings of fact attacked in appellants’ brief whereby the court found that the allegations of the complaint respecting the real character and purpose of the improvements, and that they were actually made for a private, and not a public, use, were untrue. If the findings of fact remain intact, it follows that there is nothing in the second assignment of error as to the conclusions of law.

Judgment affirmed.

(Opinion published 57 N. "W. Rep. 330.)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 N.W. 330, 56 Minn. 99, 1894 Minn. LEXIS 9, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/albrecht-v-city-of-st-paul-minn-1894.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack