Kimball v. Jones
This text of 43 N.W. 74 (Kimball v. Jones) 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.
Opinion
In Allen v. Coates, 29 Minn. 46, (11 N. W. Rep. 132,) this court held a light open buggy exempt from execution under our statutes, and the rule is stated generally, without any restriction or limitation in respect to the character or style of the vehicle, or the particular uses to which it might be applied by the debtor. That case governs this. In this case the “wagon” claimed to be exempt is a light two-seated carriage, used by the debtor “in riding to and from his work.” He may, however, at any time, find it for his interest to put it to other practical and useful purposes. It is manifest that, under the general language of the statute, any attempt to make the limitations insisted upon in this case in its construction would lead to much uncertainty and confusion in practice, each case depending upon its own peculiar facts, and leaving the rule doubtful and unsatisfactory.
Order affirmed.'
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
43 N.W. 74, 41 Minn. 318, 1889 Minn. LEXIS 352, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kimball-v-jones-minn-1889.