12,329—(39) Precedential Affirmed. Processed

Smith v. Corcoran

Minnesota Supreme Court · Filed October 18, 1900 · 83 N.W. 835

Cited by

O'LOUGHLIN v. Otis 276 N.W.2d 38 Minn. 1979
Hartkopf v. First State Bank 256 N.W. 169 Minn. 1934
In Re Estate of Mikkelson 228 N.W. 174 Minn. 1929
Lyngen v. Tessum 211 N.W. 314 Minn. 1926
Hodge v. Anderson 201 N.W. 603 Minn. 1924
Spicer v. Kennedy 174 N.W. 821 Minn. 1919
Holmes v. Loughren 105 N.W. 558 Minn. 1906

Opinion text

PER CURIAM. 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.