Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Harriet State Bank v. Samels, 204 N.W. 938.

25 citing documents.

State Ex Rel. Dison v. Hanson 78 N.W.2d 679 Minn. 1956
State Ex Rel. Dison v. Hanson 78 N.W.2d 679 Minn. 1956
This court has recognized these rules above quoted and applied them in Harriet State Bank v. Samels, 164 Minn. 265 , .
Sartori v. Capitol City Lodge No. 48, I. O. O. F. 4 N.W.2d 339 Minn. 1942
Sartori v. Capitol City Lodge No. 48, I. O. O. F. 4 N.W.2d 339 Minn. 1942
Harriet State Bank v. Samels, 164 Minn. 265 , .
La Mourea v. Rhude 295 N.W. 304 Minn. 1940
La Mourea v. Rhude 295 N.W. 304 Minn. 1940
2 Michaud v. Erickson, 108 Minn. 356 , ; Gaffney v. Sederberg, 114 Minn. 319 , ; Clark v. Clark, 164 Minn. 201 , ; Harriet State Bank v. Samels, 164 Minn. 265 , ; St.
Krippner v. Matz 287 N.W. 19 Minn. 1939
State Ex Rel. Remick v. Clousing 285 N.W. 711 Minn. 1939
State Ex Rel. Remick v. Clousing 285 N.W. 711 Minn. 1939
Harriet State Bank v. Samels, 164 Minn. 265 , .
Stark v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States 285 N.W. 466 Minn. 1939
Stark v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States 285 N.W. 466 Minn. 1939
Harriet State Bank v. Samels, 164 Minn. 265 , .
State v. Flowers 245 N.W. 834 Minn. 1932
State v. Flowers 245 N.W. 834 Minn. 1932
In Harriet State Bank v. Samels, 164 Minn. 265, 270 , , we had a similar problem and held that the statute “relates to loans and not to security for loans.” The conclusion was that a bank is not prohibited “from taking any amount or kind of security to protect it against possible loss from loans already made.” With similar logic it has been held
Nelson v. Central Metropolitan Bank 241 N.W. 585 Minn. 1932
Nelson v. Central Metropolitan Bank 241 N.W. 585 Minn. 1932
Paul, 4 Minn. 291 (385); Sutley v. Polk County State Bank, 162 Minn. 118 , ; and Harriet State Bank v. Samels, 164 Minn. 265 , , may be referred to.
Northwestern Fuel Co. v. Live Stock State Bank 234 N.W. 304 Minn. 1931
Northwestern Fuel Co. v. Live Stock State Bank 234 N.W. 304 Minn. 1931
We are supported in our conclusion that the commissioner' *281 of banks is by L. 1909, p. 191, c. 179, given exclusive power to take over insolvent banks by decisions in Harriet State Bank v. Samels, 164 Minn. 265 , .
Olson v. Thiede 225 N.W. 391 Minn. 1929
Olson v. Thiede 225 N.W. 391 Minn. 1929
The court remarked that the complaint was technically defective, but, after quoting the rule from the Vukelis case, 107 Minn. 68 , , said that, “the natural inference from this allegation is that Bradford at the same time agreed to sell.” In Harriet State Bank v. Samels, 164 Minn. 265, 273 , , it is said: “A demurrer admits all material facts well pleaded, all the inferences of fact which may fairly be made therefrom, and all necessary legal inferences which arise from the facts pleaded.” Other
Snicker v. Byers 224 N.W. 152 Minn. 1929
Snicker v. Byers 224 N.W. 152 Minn. 1929
In Harriet State Bank v. Samels, 164 Minn. 265 , , an officer and stockholder in the bank gave a bond to the superintendent of banks for the benefit of the bank.
Oehler v. City of St. Paul 219 N.W. 760 Minn. 1928
Oehler v. City of St. Paul 219 N.W. 760 Minn. 1928
“A demurrer admits all material facts well pleaded, all the inferences of fact which may fairly be made therefrom and all necessary legal inferences which.arise from the facts pleaded.” Harriet State Bank v. Samels, 164 Minn. 265, 273 , .
Hoff v. First State Bank of Watson 218 N.W. 238 Minn. 1928
Hoff v. First State Bank of Watson 218 N.W. 238 Minn. 1928
Harriet State Bank v. Samels, 164 Minn. 265 , .