State ex rel. Reynolds v. Probate Court
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 1916, 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
1 later published case cites this decision.
- State ex rel. Anderson v. Ross (Minn. 1916)
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
If for no other reason the relief sought by this, writ should be denied on the ground of the relator’s lack of diligence. Having obtained one extension of the time for filing claims against the estate, he suffered that period to expire without seeking any further extension; and this was unexcused when subsequently he sought to have another period allowed for that purpose. Then,, after the refusal of the probate court to grant this application, two months were allowed to pass before the relator sought by this writ to have the order of the probate court reviewed; and this delay is wholly unexcused.
Writ quashed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.