19,774—(29)
Precedential
Reversed.
Processed
Sands v. Dysthe
The holding in the court’s own words
Following the case cited we hold the demand sufficient.
Quoted verbatim from the opinion — no paraphrase, nothing generated. Not yet human-reviewed. How we find the holding.
Cited by
- Wermerskirchen v. Dysthe 159 N.W. 629 Minn. 1916
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Asquith v. Engstrom 133 Minn. 113
Opinion text
Per Curiam. Appeal from an order in judicial ditch proceeding dismissing appellant’s demand for a jury trial. The demand is substantially in the form of that of the appellant in Asquith v. Engstrom, 133 Minn. 113 , 157 N. W. 1004 , decided since' this appeal was taken. The demand does not describe the land but the description is ascertainable by referring to the assessment which is a part of the record. Following the case cited we hold the demand sufficient. No statutory costs will be allowed. Order reversed.