Walsh v. St. Paul Trust Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Walsh v. St. Paul Trust Co.

38 N.W. 631, 39 Minn. 23, 1888 Minn. LEXIS 12

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedJune 22, 1888

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 38 N.W. 631 (Walsh v. St. Paul Trust Co.) 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

Walsh v. St. Paul Trust Co., 38 N.W. 631, 39 Minn. 23, 1888 Minn. LEXIS 12 (Mich. 1888).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

The appellant’s claim against the estate is founded upon a contract alleged to have been made by him with the deceased verbally. The making of any contract was put in issue, and upon the trial the appellant failed to prove it, so as to entitle him to recover upon it. From the offer of proof, by the testimony of Mr. Kerr, and from the admission made in respect to the proposed testimony, it only appears that Mr. Kerr was familiar with the contract, had heard it stated by the parties, and knew exactly what it was. There was no offer and no proof as to what that contract was, — what were its terms and conditions. The offer to show that Mr. Warner was “acting for the administrator” of the estate at the time when certain papers belonging to the estate were delivered to him was not equivalent to showing that he had any authority to so act, or to contract in behalf of the estate. This is a sufficient reason, without considering others, why the proposed testimony of Mr. Warner, relating to such papers, could not affect this case.

Judgment affirmed.

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

By the Court.

The appellant’s claim against the estate is founded upon a contract alleged to have been made by him with the deceased verbally. The making of any contract was put in issue, and upon the trial the appellant failed to prove it, so as to entitle him to recover upon it. From the offer of proof, by the testimony of Mr. Kerr, and from the admission made in respect to the proposed testimony, it only appears that Mr. Kerr was familiar with the contract, had heard it stated by the parties, and knew exactly what it was. There was no offer and no proof as to what that contract was, — what were its terms and conditions. The offer to show that Mr. Warner was “acting for the administrator” of the estate at the time when certain papers belonging to the estate were delivered to him was not equivalent to showing that he had any authority to so act, or to contract in behalf of the estate. This is a sufficient reason, without considering others, why the proposed testimony of Mr. Warner, relating to such papers, could not affect this case.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 N.W. 631, 39 Minn. 23, 1888 Minn. LEXIS 12, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walsh-v-st-paul-trust-co-minn-1888.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack