Minnesota Supreme Court, 1892

Sharvey v. Rust

Sharvey v. Rust
Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided May 24, 1892 · Gilfillan
50 Minn. 97; 52 N.W. 277; 1892 Minn. LEXIS 254 (Minnesota Reports)

Sharvey v. Rust

Opinion of the Court

Gilfillan, C. J.

The elements of estoppel are wanting in this case. We need mention but one that is essential to an estoppel in pais, which is not in the case. There was no intention to mislead, and, under the circumstances, the plaintiff is not chargeable with culpable negligence in stating that his fees were $6, instead of what they actually were, — some $434. The redemption was made under a judgment in favor of White, Shannon & Reynolds, and made in their name. They were the ostensible, and, as far as plaintiff knew, the real, parties redeeming, and only parties interested in making the redemption. When he was advised by one of those parties that his fees were six dollars, he himself not knowing what they were, and when he, because so advised, stated them at that amount, neither they, nor any one claiming through them, could charge him with negligence in so stating.

Order affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.