Sullivan Lumber Co. v. Thorn

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Sullivan Lumber Co. v. Thorn

144 N.W. 1135, 124 Minn. 532, 1913 Minn. LEXIS 520

Supreme Court of Minnesota·Decided December 26, 1913·No. Nos. 18,367—(226)·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff brought action on a promissory note. Defendant admitted the note, but counterclaimed the value of services alleged to have been rendered to plaintiff. She recovered a verdict of $330.50. The only question in the case is, does the evidence sustain this verdict. We have examined the evidence in this case with care. A majority of the court are of the opinion that due weight was not given to the presumption arising from the giving of the note (Beneke v. Beneke, 119 Minn. 441, 138 N. W. 689), and that the verdict is not justified by the evidence, and that a new trial should be granted.

Order reversed and new trial granted.

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

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff brought action on a promissory note. Defendant admitted the note, but counterclaimed the value of services alleged to have been rendered to plaintiff. She recovered a verdict of $330.50. The only question in the case is, does the evidence sustain this verdict. We have examined the evidence in this case with care. A majority of the court are of the opinion that due weight was not given to the presumption arising from the giving of the note (Beneke v. Beneke, 119 Minn. 441, 138 N. W. 689), and that the verdict is not justified by the evidence, and that a new trial should be granted.

Order reversed and new trial granted.

Sullivan Lumber Co. v. Thorn, 144 N.W. 1135, 124 Minn. 532, 1913 Minn. LEXIS 520 (Mich. 1913).

Pincite

144 N.W. 1135 (Sullivan Lumber Co. v. Thorn) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related