Kimball v. Jones
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 1941, 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
4 later published cases cite this decision.
- Poznanovic v. Maki (Minn. 1941)
- Whitney v. Welnitz (Minn. 1922)
- Edberg v. Johnson (Minn. 1921)
- Shadewald v. Phillips (Minn. 1898)
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
In Allen v. Coates, 29 Minn. 46, (11 N. W. Rep. 132,) this court held a light open buggy exempt from execution under our statutes, and the rule is stated generally, without any restriction or limitation in respect to the character or style of the vehicle, or the particular uses to which it might be applied by the debtor. That case governs this. In this case the “wagon” claimed to be exempt is a light two-seated carriage, used by the debtor “in riding to and from his work.” He may, however, at any time, find it for his interest to put it to other practical and useful purposes. It is manifest that, under the general language of the statute, any attempt to make the limitations insisted upon in this case in its construction would lead to much uncertainty and confusion in practice, each case depending upon its own peculiar facts, and leaving the rule doubtful and unsatisfactory.
Order affirmed.'
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.