Frye v. Metropolitan Music Co.

104 N.W. 1149, 96 Minn. 535, 1905 Minn. LEXIS 595
Supreme Court of Minnesota·Decided December 8, 1905·No. Nos. 14,497—(106)·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from an order of the municipal court of Minneapolis sustaining defendant’s demurrer to the complaint. A majority of the court are of the opinion, after due consideration, that the instruments upon which the action is founded, which are attached to and made a part of the complaint, are separate, independent contracts or agreements, by which the defendant agreed to apply the sum of money represented by each upon separate purchases of pianos, and are only available to plaintiff, as assignee, when presented in part payment upon separate purchases by him; that he stands in the shoes of the original holders of the instruments, with no greater rights. This construction of the instruments accords with the evident intention of the parties, as made apparent from the whole document, and results in an affirmance of the order appealed from.

Order affirmed.

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

Frye v. Metropolitan Music Co., 104 N.W. 1149, 96 Minn. 535, 1905 Minn. LEXIS 595 (Mich. 1905).

104 N.W. 1149 (Frye v. Metropolitan Music Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Marriage of Kelly v. Kelly
371 N.W.2d 193 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1985)
Otter Tail Power Co. v. Village of Wheaton
49 N.W.2d 804 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1951)
Ferch v. Hiller
297 N.W. 102 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1941)
Tremont v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.
223 N.W. 137 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1929)
Tebay Land & Livestock Co. v. Hastie
210 P. 605 (Montana Supreme Court, 1922)