Hunt v. Meeker County Abstract & Loan Co.
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 1934, 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
4 later published cases cite this decision.
- State v. Waddell (Minn. 1934)
- Farmers Merchants State Bank of Hawley v. Mellum (Minn. 1928)
- Nason v. Barrett (Minn. 1918)
- Thompson v. Brunson (S.C. Ct. App. 1984)
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 court reversed the judgment of the trial court in the above entitled cause and the remittitur was transmitted to and filed in that court. Plaintiff now applies to this court to direct the trial court to make new and amended findings of fact and render judgment in his favor without a new trial. This application must be denied for the reason that, when the remittitur was filed in the lower court, the jurisdiction of this court over the cause came to an end. Rud v. Board of Co. Commrs. of Pope County, 66 Minn. 358, 68 N. W. 1062, 69 N. W. 886. It appears from the moving papers that the trial court refused to make new and amended findings of fact upon an ex parte application of plaintiff made after the cause had been remanded. The learned trial judge ruled correctly. Lawton v. Fiske, 129 Minn. 380, 152 N. W. 774.
Application denied.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.