Paget v. Barton
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 1908, 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.
- Blunt v. Egeland (Minn. 1908)
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
This is an action brought upon a contract for the sale of real estate, — the plaintiff, who was the owner of the land, claiming that there was a default in the payment of the sum of $200 purchase money; asked that the court ascertain the amount due and unpaid, and that an early day be fixed when the amount should be paid, and that in default of payment the contract be declared null .and void and forfeited, and that plaintiff have restitution of the premises. The defendants interposed a demurrer to the complaint on the •ground that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The court below overruled the demurrer, and defendants appealed. There is no merit in the appeal. The complaint is clearly sufficient, and the order of the court below overruling the demurrer is affirmed.
(Opinion published 60 N. W. 342.)
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.