Murphy v. Holterhoff

Minnesota Supreme Court
Murphy v. Holterhoff, 72 Minn. 98 (Minn. 1898)
75 N.W. 4; 1898 Minn. LEXIS 630

Can I rely on this case?

Yes — no negative treatment found

Based on 2 citing opinions

Analysis generated from citing opinions in this archive. Not legal advice.

Murphy v. Holterhoff

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

From an order discharging a garnishee, and based upon all flies, records and proceedings in the action, plaintiff appeals. The re-turn to this court contains nothing more than copies of the affidavit for garnishment, the garnishee summons, an original and supplemental report of the referee appointed to take the disclosure, an order to show cause why the garnishee shouid not be discharged, the order appealed from, and the notice of, and bond on, appeal, certified to by the clerk of the district court.

The return is clearly defective, under the rule laid down in Hospes v. Northwestern M. & C. Co., 41 Minn. 256, 43 N. W. 180, and frequently applied in later cases. It has not been made to appear affirmatively, either by the certificate of the judge making the order, or by the certificate of the clerk of the court below, that there are before this court all of the files, records and proceedings in the action on which the order was predicated, according to the recital therein found.

Order affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
JOSEPH E. MURPHY v. AUGUSTUS HOLTERHOFF and Another
Cited By
2 cases
Status
Published