Daniels v. Wainwright

4 Minn. 171
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedJuly 15, 1860
StatusPublished

This text of 4 Minn. 171 (Daniels v. Wainwright) 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
Daniels v. Wainwright, 4 Minn. 171 (Mich. 1860).

Opinion

Elandrau, J.

By the Court No objection was made by the-Defendants or any of them in the court below to the assess[172]*172ment of damages by tbe court. The note stipulated for interest at the rate of five per cent, per month after maturity, and the court had a right to suppose that if the Defendants did not want judgment to pass against them for that amount, they would say so, as they all appeared. If they were dissatisfied with his assessment, they should have asked him to correct it or make a new assessment. There is no decision of the court below that is properly here for review under the case of Babcock & Hollinshead vs. Sanborn & French, 3 Minn. 141.

The judgment is affirmed, but the case is remanded without prejudice to an application being made below for the relief sought here.

Chief Justice Tmmett dissents from the foregoing opinion.

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

Related

Babcock v. Sanborn
3 Minn. 141 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1859)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 Minn. 171, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daniels-v-wainwright-minn-1860.