Minnesota Supreme Court, 1891

Sauter v. Dollman

Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided July 7, 1891 · Gilfillan

46 Minn. 504; 49 N.W. 258; 1891 Minn. LEXIS 375 (Minnesota Reports)

Counsel

W. F. Schoregge, for appellants., J. V. V. Lewis, 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 2003, 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

2 later published cases cite this decision.

In re the Estate of Savich (Minn. Ct. App. 2003)
Barnard v. Thurston (Minn. 1902)

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

Gilfillan, C. J.

The court below having found (and the evidence fully sustains the finding) that the deed signed by William Dollman and wife was not, during the life of William Dollman, delivered to *505the grantee named in it, how, after his death, the grantee named in it got possession of it, by threats, fraud, or the voluntary act of the wife, is immaterial. It could not be made operative by her delivery after the death of William, the owner of the property. The finding that the conveyance by William Dollman, Jr., to Siegfried Dollmah was without consideration is sustained by the evidence. That no consideration was paid at the time of its execution was directly shown, and the testimony of Siegfried to the subsequent payment was, even as it appears of record, of so suspicious a character that we can well see how the court, having the witness before it, might discredit the testimony. There is nothing requiring notice in any of the other assignments of error.

Judgment affirmed..

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