Goldale Liquor Co. v. Bailys

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Goldale Liquor Co. v. Bailys

174 N.W. 821, 144 Minn. 464, 1919 Minn. LEXIS 764

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedNovember 28, 1919

DocketNo. 21,473

StatusPublished

This text of 174 N.W. 821 (Goldale Liquor Co. v. Bailys) 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

Goldale Liquor Co. v. Bailys, 174 N.W. 821, 144 Minn. 464, 1919 Minn. LEXIS 764 (Mich. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Cubiam.

The only question involved on this appeal is whether the findings of the trial court are sustained by the evidence. ■ The action is upon a promissory [465]*465note. Defendant interposed in defence an agreement between the parties by which defendant agreed to transfer to plaintiffs his saloon business with stock and fixtures in full discharge of the note; that plaintiffs agreed to accept the same. It appears that the agreement was made, but the trial court found as a fact that it was never parried out or performed by the partie's, and by mutual consent was subsequently rescinded. Our examination of the record discloses sufficient evidence to support the findings.

The record presents no reversible error and the order appealed from is affirmed.

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

Per Cubiam.

The only question involved on this appeal is whether the findings of the trial court are sustained by the evidence. ■ The action is upon a promissory [465]*465note. Defendant interposed in defence an agreement between the parties by which defendant agreed to transfer to plaintiffs his saloon business with stock and fixtures in full discharge of the note; that plaintiffs agreed to accept the same. It appears that the agreement was made, but the trial court found as a fact that it was never parried out or performed by the partie's, and by mutual consent was subsequently rescinded. Our examination of the record discloses sufficient evidence to support the findings.

The record presents no reversible error and the order appealed from is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

174 N.W. 821, 144 Minn. 464, 1919 Minn. LEXIS 764, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goldale-liquor-co-v-bailys-minn-1919.