Johnson v. Johnson

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Johnson v. Johnson

58 N.W. 824, 57 Minn. 100, 1894 Minn. LEXIS 230

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedApril 20, 1894

DocketNo. 8684

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 58 N.W. 824 (Johnson v. Johnson) 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

Johnson v. Johnson, 58 N.W. 824, 57 Minn. 100, 1894 Minn. LEXIS 230 (Mich. 1894).

Pincite

Opinion

Mitchell, J.

The defendant’s first assignment of error, to wit, that the Municipal Court of St Paul “erred in assuming jurisdiction to try and determine the action,” not being discussed or referred to in the points or argument, must be deemed to have been abandoned.

The judgment of the District Court of Ramsey county, in this state, in the former action between the same parties, was conclusive between them upon all issues, whether principal or subordinate, which were actually tried and directly passed upon, and was not subject to collateral attack, and was decisive, adversely to defendant, of every material issue in the present action, unless it was as to defendant’s nonpayment of rent But an examination of the record satisfies us that the trial proceeded throughout upon the theory that there was no such issue in the case, and that the point was [104]*104never once suggested or called to the attention of the court on the trial. There are no merits in the appeal.

Judgment affirmed, and cause remanded, with directions to the court below to enforce the judgment.

(Opinion published 58 N. W, 824.)

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

Mitchell, J.

The defendant’s first assignment of error, to wit, that the Municipal Court of St Paul “erred in assuming jurisdiction to try and determine the action,” not being discussed or referred to in the points or argument, must be deemed to have been abandoned.

The judgment of the District Court of Ramsey county, in this state, in the former action between the same parties, was conclusive between them upon all issues, whether principal or subordinate, which were actually tried and directly passed upon, and was not subject to collateral attack, and was decisive, adversely to defendant, of every material issue in the present action, unless it was as to defendant’s nonpayment of rent But an examination of the record satisfies us that the trial proceeded throughout upon the theory that there was no such issue in the case, and that the point was [104]*104never once suggested or called to the attention of the court on the trial. There are no merits in the appeal.

Judgment affirmed, and cause remanded, with directions to the court below to enforce the judgment.

(Opinion published 58 N. W, 824.)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 N.W. 824, 57 Minn. 100, 1894 Minn. LEXIS 230, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-johnson-minn-1894.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack