Howland v. Jeuel

56 N.W. 581, 55 Minn. 102, 1893 Minn. LEXIS 152
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedOctober 20, 1893
DocketNo. 8323
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 56 N.W. 581 (Howland v. Jeuel) 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
Howland v. Jeuel, 56 N.W. 581, 55 Minn. 102, 1893 Minn. LEXIS 152 (Mich. 1893).

Opinion

Mitchell, J.

It is more than doubtful whether the record in this case is sufficient to bring up any question for review. But, waiving this point, we discover no merit in the appeal.

The voluntary general appearance of the appellant waived all defects in the garnishee summons or in the mode of its service on the garnishee. It was not necessary that the affidavit of garnishment should state that the garnishee was a corporation. It is at least an open question whether it is necessary, even in a pleading in an action by or against a corporation, to aver the incorporation, except in cases where the action, as its gist or substance, involves the corporate existence, in which case, of course, it would have to be alleged, the same as any other fact constituting the cause of action. No such averment was required at common law, and we have no express statute changing the rule. 1878 G. S. ch. 66, § 111, was intended merely to simplify the form of pleading where an averment of incorporation is necessary. Dodge v. Minnesota P. S. Roofing Co., 14 Minn. 49, (Gil. 39.)

But it is enough for the present purposes to say that the statute in relation to affidavits for garnishment (1878 G. S. ch. 66, § 164) does not require any such averment, and, as in any case of attachment, an affidavit is sufficient if it conforms to the statute.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Security State Bank v. Thor
238 N.W. 52 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1931)
Ferreira v. Kamo
18 Haw. 593 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1908)
Barr v. Warner
62 P. 899 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1900)
Holden v. Great Western Elevator Co.
72 N.W. 805 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1897)
Gilmore & Ruhl v. Cohn
102 Iowa 254 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1897)
Aultman, Miller & Co. v. Markley
63 N.W. 1078 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
56 N.W. 581, 55 Minn. 102, 1893 Minn. LEXIS 152, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/howland-v-jeuel-minn-1893.