Minnesota Supreme Court, 1914

Anderson v. Peterson

Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided May 29, 1914

125 Minn. 534; 147 N.W. 426; 1914 Minn. LEXIS 822 (Minnesota Reports)

Counsel

J. A. Hendricks, for appellant., Oscar T. Stenvick, 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 1972, 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.

In re Candidacy of Daly (Minn. 1972)

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

Per Curiam.

The only question presented in this case is whether the version of the transaction given by plaintiff or that given by defendant is correct. They flatly contradict each other. It is the province of the jury to determine controverted ques*535tions of fact, and tlieir decision, if reasonably supported by the evidence, is binding upon the court. The disputed questions were properly submitted to the jury and they have found in favor of plaintiff. The evidence is sufficient to sustain the verdict, and the record discloses no ground which will justify this court in setting it aside.

Order affirmed.

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