Millette v. Mehmke
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 1928, 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
Cases that cite this one
14 later published cases cite this decision.
- Sievert v. Selvig (Minn. 1928)
- Francis v. Knerr (Minn. 1921)
- Meharg v. Alabama Power Co. (Ala. 1918)
- Ferrier v. McCabe (Minn. 1915)
- West Mountain Lime & Stone Co. v. Danley (Utah 1910)
- W. W. Kimball Co. v. Brown (Minn. 1898)
- Lee v. Clark (Minn. 1893)
- Houlton v. Gallow (Minn. 1893)
- Trebby v. Simmons (Minn. 1888)
- Coman v. Williams (N.D. 1951)
- Serrano v. Berdiel (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico 1915)
- Llorens v. Castillo (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico 1915)
- Serrano v. Berdiel (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico 1915)
- Llorens v. Castillo (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico 1915)
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
The summons was served with a copy of the complaint, but instead of referring to such copy as that which defendant was required to answer,- the summons required him to answer the complaint “which has been filed in the office of the clerk,” etc. No complaint, was filed.
Within the decision in Tuller v. Caldwell, 3 Minn. 67, (117,) the court acquired no jurisdiction by such service. But we think that decision goes too far, and the correct rule to be that if the summons is regular on its face,.and is served in the.manner provided by statute, the court, thereby acquires jurisdiction; and that if the complaint be not filed, nor a copy served, as stated in the summons, it is only an irregu
The judgment which was entered on default must, however, be reversed, on the ground that the complaint does not state facts • sufficient to- constitute a cause of action, because it appears that the right of action on the judgment sued upon was barred by the statute of limitations before the action was •commenced. Kennedy v. Williams, 11 Minn. 219 (314;) McArdle v. McArdle, 12 Minn. 98.
Judgment reversed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.