Minnesota Supreme Court, 1914

Wilson v. Henningsen

Wilson v. Henningsen
Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided October 16, 1914
127 Minn. 520; 148 N.W. 1081; 1914 Minn. LEXIS 934 (Minnesota Reports)

Counsel

N. F. W. Bemwngsem, pro se., Wilson & Thoreen, for respondents.

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 1961, 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

Wilson v. Henningsen

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

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 defendant appeals from a judgment. The so-called paper book does not contain the judgment, but the original judgment roll is in the return to this court. An inspection thereof reveals no error. In the litigation defendant has been his own attorney. Because of his apparent inexperience in legal procedure, we have examined the documents in the return and the files herein with a view to discover his grievances (there being no assignments of error), and we find these relate to claimed defects in the evidence and errors in the charge of the court. There is no settled case or bill of exceptions. We are therefore not in a position to consider any matter which the appellant intended to raise by his appeal, and it should be dismissed. So ordered.

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