State ex rel. Berryhill v. Cory

Supreme Court of Minnesota

State ex rel. Berryhill v. Cory

28 N.W. 217, 35 Minn. 178, 1886 Minn. LEXIS 77

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedMay 10, 1886

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 28 N.W. 217 (State ex rel. Berryhill v. Cory) 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

State ex rel. Berryhill v. Cory, 28 N.W. 217, 35 Minn. 178, 1886 Minn. LEXIS 77 (Mich. 1886).

Pincite

Opinion

Mitchell, J.

This is not a proper case for a writ of prohibition. The action pending in the municipal court (forcible entry and de-tainer) is one proceeding, in the ordinary way, by summons, pleadings, trial, etc. The cause of action set forth in the complaint is within the jurisdiction of the court. The only question is whether that court has jurisdiction to try and determine the issues presented by the allegations of fraud and usury set up in the answer. If it errs in passing upon the extent of its jurisdiction in that regard, an adequate mode of review by appeal is open to the relator, and therefore a writ of prohibition ought not to issue. High, Extr. Kem. § 770; State v. Municipal Court of St. Paul, 26 Minn. 162, (2 N. W. [179]*179Rep. 166;); State v. District Court for Ramsey Co., 26 Minn. 233, (2 N. W. Rep. 698.)

Writ quashed. —— ~" '

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

Mitchell, J.

This is not a proper case for a writ of prohibition. The action pending in the municipal court (forcible entry and de-tainer) is one proceeding, in the ordinary way, by summons, pleadings, trial, etc. The cause of action set forth in the complaint is within the jurisdiction of the court. The only question is whether that court has jurisdiction to try and determine the issues presented by the allegations of fraud and usury set up in the answer. If it errs in passing upon the extent of its jurisdiction in that regard, an adequate mode of review by appeal is open to the relator, and therefore a writ of prohibition ought not to issue. High, Extr. Kem. § 770; State v. Municipal Court of St. Paul, 26 Minn. 162, (2 N. W. [179]*179Rep. 166;); State v. District Court for Ramsey Co., 26 Minn. 233, (2 N. W. Rep. 698.)

Writ quashed. —— ~" '

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 N.W. 217, 35 Minn. 178, 1886 Minn. LEXIS 77, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-berryhill-v-cory-minn-1886.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack