Minnesota Supreme Court, 1884

Smith v. Harmon

Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided July 18, 1884 · Gilfillan

32 Minn. 312; 20 N.W. 238; 1884 Minn. LEXIS 160 (Minnesota Reports)

Counsel

E. N. Donaldson, for appellant., Prater é Pernalcl, for respondent.

Opinion of the Court

Gilfillan, C. J.

The application to set aside the judgment and for leave to answer was addressed to the discretion of the court below. There is no pretence for saying that there was any abuse of discretion, and the order appealed from must be affirmed.

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