Minnesota Supreme Court, 1886

O'Keefe v. Lenfest

O'Keefe v. Lenfest
Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided May 26, 1886 · Gileillan
35 Minn. 237; 28 N.W. 260; 1886 Minn. LEXIS 103 (Minnesota Reports)

Counsel

O’Brien é O’Brien, for appellant., D. L. Bugbee, 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 1892, 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

O'Keefe v. Lenfest

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

Gileillan, C. J.

The evidence in this ease is sufficient to sustain a finding that the' goods for the conversion of which the action is brought were taken from the actual possession of the plaintiff. So far as the motion for a new trial was based on the alleged misconduct of the plaintiff, and surprise on the part of defendant, the same consisting in plaintiff’s proceeding with the trial when the cause was called in its order on the calendar, instead of having it set for a day certain, and giving defendant notice of it, as his attorney had agreed with defendant’s attorney to do, it was properly denied, because there was no affidavit of merits.

Order affirmed.

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