Minnesota Supreme Court, 1869

Johnson v. Knoblauch

Johnson v. Knoblauch
Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided January 15, 1869 · Momillan
14 Minn. 16 (Minnesota Reports)

Counsel

' WaeNek & PecK for Appellants., Baxter & Sargent for Despondent.

Can I rely on this case?

Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.

(as of 9/30/2026)

Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1878, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.

Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error

Johnson v. Knoblauch

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

By the Court.

MoMillan, J.

The defendants by appearing generally in the action waived their right to object to a defect in the service of the summons, or the return of service by the officer.

The only remaining objection is that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The complaint states that an express contract was made between the plaintiff and defendants, by which the defendants or*18dered “certain feet of lumber” to be delivered at Carver, and agreed to pay for the same. It also appears that the plaintiff by his agent delivered at Carver 400 feet of lumber of a specific kind at $25 per thousand feet, together with $3.20 for hauling the same, amounting to S 13.20; that the lumber delivered was the lumber ordered, and that the amount specified remains due and unpaid.. The complaint is not accurately framed, but under the liberal rules of construction properly applied to pleadings before a Justice of the Peace, wé think the allegations in the complaint are sufficient to sustain the judgment.

Judgment affirmed.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.