Smith v. Corcoran
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 1926, 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.
- Lyngen v. Tessum (Minn. 1926)
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 action was brought to collect a balance due on an account for goods, wares, and merchandise sold by plaintiff ta defendant; it being admitted by both parties that the property sold consisted largely of intoxicating liquors. The defense was that the defendant at the time of such sales was an habitual drunkard. This was the main issue submitted to the jury, and the verdict was for the plaintiff. There was evidence to sustain it, and, under the well-known rule, the order appealed from, which denied defendant’s motion for a new trial, must be, and hereby is, affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.