Shaughnessey v. Shaughnessey
This text of 167 N.W. 1046 (Shaughnessey v. Shaughnessey) 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
On the former appeal it was held that the evidence in the record would support a finding either way upon the two controlling issues whether a deed was obtained from the grantor by means of undue influence, and whether there had been a delivery of the deed. For error in the instructions to the jury a new trial was granted. A new trial was had, and the two issues mentioned were submitted to the court upon the record reviewed in the former appeal, no new or additional testimony being adduced relative thereto. The court found against defendants on both issues. They again appealed, and plaintiifs move to dismiss on the ground that the appeal is not taken in good faith but only for the purpose' of delay.
In view of our previous review of the identical evidence upon which these decisive findings are based and the conclusion then reached, it would seem to be entirely clear that the present appeal must be wholly futile. The motion to dismiss is therefore granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
167 N.W. 1046, 140 Minn. 513, 1918 Minn. LEXIS 669, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shaughnessey-v-shaughnessey-minn-1918.