Webster v. Bader

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Webster v. Bader

123 N.W. 289, 109 Minn. 146, 1909 Minn. LEXIS 437

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedNovember 19, 1909

DocketNos. 16,381—(85)

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 123 N.W. 289 (Webster v. Bader) 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

Webster v. Bader, 123 N.W. 289, 109 Minn. 146, 1909 Minn. LEXIS 437 (Mich. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

BROWN, J.

Defendant Sorg purchased of plaintiff an automobile, and in part payment therefor made and delivered to plaintiff his two promissory notes, of $450 each, which defendant Bader signed as surety. After the maturity of the notes, plaintiff brought two separate actions in the municipal court of Minneapolis to recover thereon, and defendants interposed in each the defense of a breach of warranty in the sale of the automobile and resulting damages. When the actions were called for trial in the municipal court, defendants moved that they be consolidated, and, as the aggregate amount sought to be recovered by plaintiff in both actions exceeded the jurisdiction of that court, that they be transferred to the district court of Hennepin county. The motion was denied, and defendants appealed.

The order is not appealable, and the appeal is dismissed.

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

BROWN, J.

Defendant Sorg purchased of plaintiff an automobile, and in part payment therefor made and delivered to plaintiff his two promissory notes, of $450 each, which defendant Bader signed as surety. After the maturity of the notes, plaintiff brought two separate actions in the municipal court of Minneapolis to recover thereon, and defendants interposed in each the defense of a breach of warranty in the sale of the automobile and resulting damages. When the actions were called for trial in the municipal court, defendants moved that they be consolidated, and, as the aggregate amount sought to be recovered by plaintiff in both actions exceeded the jurisdiction of that court, that they be transferred to the district court of Hennepin county. The motion was denied, and defendants appealed.

The order is not appealable, and the appeal is dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 N.W. 289, 109 Minn. 146, 1909 Minn. LEXIS 437, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/webster-v-bader-minn-1909.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack