Melin v. Maybury

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Melin v. Maybury

163 N.W. 1069, 137 Minn. 478, 1917 Minn. LEXIS 778

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedJuly 6, 1917

DocketNos. 20,242 — (55)

StatusPublished

This text of 163 N.W. 1069 (Melin v. Maybury) 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

Melin v. Maybury, 163 N.W. 1069, 137 Minn. 478, 1917 Minn. LEXIS 778 (Mich. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Curiam.

Plaintiffs procured a default judgment against defendant for rent. The court granted the motion of defendant to set aside this judgment and be permitted to answer. The answer was filed and plaintiffs moved to strike it out as sham and frivolous. The court granted this motion, but gave defendant leave to serve an amended answer. Plaintiffs appealed from this order, in that it denied judgment in favor of plaintiffs, and granted defendant leave to answer.

We do not decide that the order is appealable. We hold that there was no abuse of discretion.

Order affirmed.

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

Pee Curiam.

Plaintiffs procured a default judgment against defendant for rent. The court granted the motion of defendant to set aside this judgment and be permitted to answer. The answer was filed and plaintiffs moved to strike it out as sham and frivolous. The court granted this motion, but gave defendant leave to serve an amended answer. Plaintiffs appealed from this order, in that it denied judgment in favor of plaintiffs, and granted defendant leave to answer.

We do not decide that the order is appealable. We hold that there was no abuse of discretion.

Order affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

163 N.W. 1069, 137 Minn. 478, 1917 Minn. LEXIS 778, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/melin-v-maybury-minn-1917.