Minnesota Supreme Court, 1874

Hartman v. Munch

Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided October 21, 1874 · Berry

21 Minn. 107; 1874 Minn. LEXIS 27 (Minnesota Reports)

Counsel

Sylvester Kipp, for appellant., Daniel Piclcit, for respondent.

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

Wheatley v. Griffin (Tex. 1883)
Randal v. Elder (Kan. 1873)

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

Berry, J.

Adam Munch was assignee of two school-*108land certificates, of the same character as those considered in Wilder v. Haughey (ante, p. 101). It appeared that he had assigned the certificates to the plaintiff, but that the defendant (his wife) did not join in the assignment. It also appeared that at the time when the assignment was executed, the premises covered by the certificates were occupied by said Adam and the defendant, they claiming the same as a homestead. The right and interest of said Adam being such as to entitle him to hold the premises as a homestead, under the provisions of ch. 68, Gen. Stat., as we have determined at this term in Wilder v. Haughey, ante, p. 101, the court below was right in holding the assignment to be invalid.

The return is not in a condition to enable us to consider the point made as to the entry of judgment, or the alleged failure to attach a copy thereof to the roll.

Judgment affirmed.

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