DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Wilson v. Proctor, 8 N.W. 830.

32 citing documents.

  • In Re Estate of Ablan 591 N.W.2d 725 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
  • In Re Estate of Ablan 591 N.W.2d 725 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
    736, 737 (1927); Wilson v. Proctor, 28 Minn. 13, 16 , 8 N.W.
  • Bengtson v. Setterberg 35 N.W.2d 623 Minn. 1949
  • Bengtson v. Setterberg 35 N.W.2d 623 Minn. 1949
    ed or the person to receive it, for the words employed in assigning the estate are those generally used to describe the highest and most absolute ownership, and unquestionably the only heir in whom the decree pretends to vest the estate is Sarah J. Miller.” Some confusion has arisen as to whether the homestead of a decedent is part of his estate, because of the language used in Wilson v. Proctor, 28 Minn. 13, 16 , , where Mr. Justice Mitchell, speaking for the court, said: “* * * We do not think
  • Turner v. Edwards 292 N.W. 257 Minn. 1940
  • Turner v. Edwards 292 N.W. 257 Minn. 1940
    § 3170; Wilson v. Proctor, 28 Minn. 13 , ; Smalley v. Isaacson, 40 Minn. 450 , ; St.
  • In Re Estate of Anderson 279 N.W. 266 Minn. 1938
  • Dills v. Axberg 202 Minn. 513 Minn. 1938
  • Dills v. Axberg 202 Minn. 513 Minn. 1938
    Wilson v. Proctor, 28 Minn. 13, 16 , ; In re Estate of Christianson, 191 Minn. 166 , .
  • In Re Estate of Anderson 279 N.W. 266 Minn. 1938
    Wilson v. Proctor, 28 Minn. 13 , 16 , 8 N.W.
  • In Re Estate of Christianson 253 N.W. 661 Minn. 1934
  • In Re Estate of Christianson 253 N.W. 661 Minn. 1934
    Wilson v. Proctor, 28 Minn. 13 , ; Nordlund v. Dahlgren, 130 Minn. 462 , , Ann. Cas.
  • In re the Estate of Murphy 146 Minn. 418 Minn. 1920
  • In re the Estate of Murphy 146 Minn. 418 Minn. 1920
    1917B, 941; Wilson v. Proctor, 28 Minn. 13 , .
  • Rux v. Adam 172 N.W. 912 Minn. 1919
  • Rux v. Adam 172 N.W. 912 Minn. 1919
    G. S. 1913, § 7337; Wilson v; Proctor, 28 Minn. 13 , ; Sammons v. Higbie’s Estate, 103 Minn. 448 , ; Nordlund v. Dahlgren, 130 Minn. 462 , , Ann. Cas.
  • Nordlund v. Dahlgren 153 N.W. 876 Minn. 1915
  • Nordlund v. Dahlgren 153 N.W. 876 Minn. 1915
    Smalley v. Isaacson, 40 Minn. 450 , ; Wilson v. Proctor, 28 Minn. 13 , ; St.
  • Fraser v. Farmers' & Mechanics' Savings Bank 95 N.W. 307 Minn. 1903
  • Fraser v. Farmers' & Mechanics' Savings Bank 95 N.W. 307 Minn. 1903
    Wilson v. Proctor, 28 Minn. 13 , ; Tracy v. Tracy, 79 Minn. 267 , .
  • Phelps v. Northern Trust Co. 73 N.W. 842 Minn. 1897
  • Phelps v. Northern Trust Co. 73 N.W. 842 Minn. 1897
    Wilson v. Proctor, 28 Minn. 14 , .
  • Ford v. Clement 71 N.W. 672 Minn. 1897
  • Ford v. Clement 71 N.W. 672 Minn. 1897
    In Wilson v. Proctor, 28 Minn. 13 , , it was said that the -word “lot,” as used in our statute, is not to be understood as synonymous with the word “tract” or “parcel,” but in the sense of a city, town, or village lot, according to the plat of the city, town, or village in which the property was situated.
  • Lundberg v. Sharvey 49 N.W. 60 Minn. 1891
  • Lundberg v. Sharvey 49 N.W. 60 Minn. 1891
    1878, c. 68, § 1) exempts “a quantity of land not exceeding in amount one lot, if within the laid-out or platted portion of any incorporated town, city, or village, having over five thousand inhabitants.” In Wilson v. Proctor, 28 Minn. 13 , ( 8 N. W. Rep.
  • Winston v. Johnson 45 N.W. 958 Minn. 1890
  • Winston v. Johnson 45 N.W. 958 Minn. 1890
    An application of the rule, in this state, may be found in Wilson v. Proctor, 28 Minn. 13 , ( 8 N. W. Rep.
  • Baldwin v. Robinson 39 N.W. 321 Minn. 1888
  • Baldwin v. Robinson 39 N.W. 321 Minn. 1888
    Wilson v. Proctor, 28 Minn. 13 , ( 8 N. W. Rep.
  • Holbrook v. Wightman 17 N.W. 280 Minn. 1883
  • Holbrook v. Wightman 17 N.W. 280 Minn. 1883
    The construction of the provisions of the statute in question was not under consideration in Wilson v. Proctor, 28 Minn. 13 .