Minnesota Supreme Court, 1885

Thompson v. Lamb

Thompson v. Lamb
Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided February 11, 1885
33 Minn. 196; 22 N.W. 443; 1885 Minn. LEXIS 42 (Minnesota Reports)

Counsel

Thayer á Hibner and N. F. Lamb, for appellants., J. D. Farmer & Go', and Cameron, Losey & Bunn, for respondent.

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 1955, 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

Thompson v. Lamb

Cases that cite this one

4 later published cases cite 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.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon the determination of the issues by the court, upon trial without a jury. No questions are presented for review except such as relate to the correctness of the findings of fact made by the court. But there is no case or bill of exceptions showing upon what evidence the findings were based, and therefore it must be presumed that they are in accordance with the proof. A transcript of the court reporter’s notes *197of evidence, merely certified by him, does not constitute a record of the case. There is nothing for us to consider, and the judgment is affirmed.

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