Everett v. Smith

Decision Date10 July 1875
Citation22 Minn. 53
PartiesREDDEN H. EVERETT <I>vs.</I> EDSON R. SMITH.
CourtMinnesota Supreme Court

M. J. Severance, L. M. Brown, and Horace Austin, for appellant.

Gilman, Clough & Lane, for respondent.

BERRY, J.

Section 1, art. 11, of the constitution of this state...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
44 cases
  • In re Denny
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • February 1, 1901
    ...Ky. 474, 36 S. W. 1118, 34 L. R. A. 256;Stebbins v. Judge, 108 Mich. 693, 66 N. W. 594;Bayard v. Klinge, 16 Minn. 249 (Gil. 221); Everett v. Smith, 22 Minn. 53;Slingerland v. Norton, 59 Minn. 351, 61 N. W. 322;Smith v. Board, 64 Minn. 16, 65 N. W. 950;State v. Powell (Miss.) 27 South. 927, ......
  • Green v. State Board of Canvassers
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • December 24, 1896
    ...is necessary. (Duke v. Brown, 96 N.C. 127, 131, 1 S.E. 873; Bayard v. Klinge, 16 Minn. 249; Taylor v. Taylor, 10 Minn. 81; Everitt v. Smith, 22 Minn. 53; v. Wiant, 48 Ill. 263, 266; Chestnutwood v. Hood, 68 Ill. 132.) The construction for which we contend is clearly sustained by the cases o......
  • Rice v. Palmer
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • April 23, 1906
    ...Ohio St. 677; 77 Miss. 545; 37 Wis. 534, criticising, if not overruling, 20 Wis. 544; 54 Mo. 392; 73 Mo. 435; 138 Mo. 187; 16 Minn. 249; 22 Minn. 53; 102 Cal. 298; 108 Mich. 693; 99 Ky. 475; 20 160; 48 Ill. 263; 68 Ill. 132; 15 Kan. 500; 47 P. 259; 20 Ore. 154; 68 Md. 140. The importance of......
  • In re Denny
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • February 1, 1901
    ... ... 474, ... 36 S.W. 1118, 34 L. R. A. 256; Stebbins v ... Judge, 108 Mich. 693, 66 N.W. 594; Bayard ... v. Klinge, 16 Minn. 249; Everett v ... Smith, 22 Minn. 53; Slingerland v ... Norton, 59 Minn. 351, 61 N.W. 322; Smith v ... Board, etc., 64 Minn. 16, 65 N.W. 956; ... ...
  • Get Started for Free