Watson v. Padgett

144 Minn. 462
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedNovember 28, 1919
DocketNos. 21,406, 21,407, 21,408, 21,414, 21,416, 21,417, 21,418, 21,419, 21,420, 21,421, 21,424, 21,425, 21,426; No. 21,427
StatusPublished

This text of 144 Minn. 462 (Watson v. Padgett) 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
Watson v. Padgett, 144 Minn. 462 (Mich. 1919).

Opinion

Pee Curiam.

These are cases referred to in Sheldon v. Padgett, supra, page 141, 174 N. W. 827. The same proceedings were had and substantially the same facts found, except that the names and amounts were different, and in the Sheldon case there were full formal assignments of the claims attached to the statement filed in the office of the surveyor general and the original indorsed time checks were attached to the statement filed in the clerk's office, and in the 'Swartz case plaintiff was the original holder of the time check and there was no assignment. We hold, following conclusions reached in that case, that the judgment herein appealed from should be sustained.

Affirmed.

Brown, C. J., took no part in these cases.

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

Related

Sheldon v. Padgett
174 N.W. 827 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1919)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
144 Minn. 462, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/watson-v-padgett-minn-1919.