Finke v. Lukensmeyer

53 N.W. 546, 51 Minn. 252, 1892 Minn. LEXIS 57
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedNovember 11, 1892
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 53 N.W. 546 (Finke v. Lukensmeyer) 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
Finke v. Lukensmeyer, 53 N.W. 546, 51 Minn. 252, 1892 Minn. LEXIS 57 (Mich. 1892).

Opinion

Collins, J.

The judgment appealed from will have to be affirmed. On questions of both law and fact, defendant appealed to the district court from a judgment rendered by a justice of the peace. It was not material in the appellate court to consider whether the judgment appealed from was valid or unauthorized, for the justice had jurisdiction of the parties and of the subject-matter. The appeal on both law and fact brought the case to the district court for trial de novo upon its merits. This has been held repeatedly here. See Bingham v. Stewart, 14 Minn. 214, (Gil. 153;) Craighead v. Martin, 25 Minn. 41; Seurer v. Horst, 31 Minn. 479, (18 N. W. Rep. 283;) Welter v. Nokken, 38 Minn. 376, (37 N. W. Rep. 947;) McOmber v. Balow, 40 Minn. 388, (42 N. W. Rep. 83.)

Judgment affirmed.

(Opinion published 53 N. W. Rep. 546.)

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

Related

Haney v. Welty
162 P. 932 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1917)
Sheehy v. Whipps
141 N.W. 811 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1913)
Hughes v. Chicago, Indianapolis & Louisville Railway Co.
98 N.E. 317 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1912)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
53 N.W. 546, 51 Minn. 252, 1892 Minn. LEXIS 57, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/finke-v-lukensmeyer-minn-1892.