Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Sprague v. Martin, 13 N.W. 34.

30 citing documents.

Prime Security Bank v. A&G Investments, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Prime Security Bank v. A&G Investments, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Sprague v. Martin, 29 Minn. 226, 230-31, 13 N.W.
City of St. Paul ex rel. Housing & Redevelopment Authority v. St. Anthony Flats Ltd. Partnership 517 N.W.2d 58 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
City of St. Paul ex rel. Housing & Redevelopment Authority v. St. Anthony Flats Ltd. Partnership 517 N.W.2d 58 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
See Sprague v. Martin, 29 Minn. *61 226, 231 , see also Minn.Stat.
Estate of Frantz v. Page 426 N.W.2d 894 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Estate of Frantz v. Page 426 N.W.2d 894 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Willwerscheid argues that not only were the court’s findings erroneous, but also that the court erred under Sprague v. Martin, 29 Minn. 226, 230 , 13 N.W.
State v. McAndrews 175 N.W.2d 492 Minn. 1970
State v. McAndrews 175 N.W.2d 492 Minn. 1970
Co. 29 Minn. 318 , , and Wilmes v. Minneapolis & N. W. Ry.
Hughes v. Young 120 P.2d 396 Ariz. 1941
Crown Iron Works Co. v. Melin 198 N.W. 462 Minn. 1924
Crown Iron Works Co. v. Melin 198 N.W. 462 Minn. 1924
Northland Pine Co. v. Northern Insulating Co. 145 Minn. 395 , ; Lowry v. Akers, 50 Minn. 508 , ; Sprague v. Martin, 29 Minn. 226 , 13 N. *200 W. 34 ; Dunnell, Minn. Dig.
Winne v. Lahart 193 N.W. 587 Minn. 1923
Winne v. Lahart 193 N.W. 587 Minn. 1923
It has been held that the purpose of a foreclosure proceeding is to have the mortgaged property applied to the satisfaction of the debt, Sprague v. Martin, 2, 9 Minn. 226 , ; that, although an action to foreclose is one in personam, in a sense it is in the nature of a proceeding in rem, because it has for its object the enforcement of the lien of the mortgage on specific property, Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , , 9 L. R. A. 152, 20 Am.
Northland Pine Co. v. Northern Insulating Co. 177 N.W. 635 Minn. 1920
Northland Pine Co. v. Northern Insulating Co. 177 N.W. 635 Minn. 1920
In Sprague v. Martin, 29 Minn. 226 , , it was held that a redemption is a satisfaction of the debt due the creditor redeeming to the extent only of the value of the property redeemed, less the sum paid to effect redemption.
Orr v. Sutton 148 N.W. 1066 Minn. 1914
Powers v. Sherry 132 N.W. 210 Minn. 1911
Powers v. Sherry 132 N.W. 210 Minn. 1911
Sprague v. Martin, 29 Minn. 226, 230 , ; Cuilerier v. Brunelle, 37 Minn. 71 , .
Bartleson v. Munson 117 N.W. 512 Minn. 1908
Bartleson v. Munson 117 N.W. 512 Minn. 1908
The evident pur pose of this statutory plan for redemption by creditors through a kin of auction sale is to make the land bring its utmost value while pre serving the rights of each creditor according to the seniority of hi lien.- '-Pamperin v. Scanlan, 28 Minn. 345 , ; Sprague v. Martin, 29 Minn. 226 , ; Todd v. Johnson, 56 Minn. 60 , .
White v. Leeds Importing Co. 75 N.W. 595 Minn. 1898
White v. Leeds Importing Co. 75 N.W. 595 Minn. 1898
Sprague v. Martin, 29 Minn. 226 , .
Swanson v. Realization & Debenture Corp. 73 N.W. 165 Minn. 1897
Swanson v. Realization & Debenture Corp. 73 N.W. 165 Minn. 1897
See Sprague v. Martin, 29 Minn. 226 , ; Smith v. Buse, 35 Minn. 234 , ; Todd v. Johnson, 50 Minn. 310 , .
Todd v. Johnson 57 N.W. 320 Minn. 1893
Todd v. Johnson 57 N.W. 320 Minn. 1893
Sprague v. Martin, 29 Minn. 231 , ( .)
Lowry v. Akers 52 N.W. 922 Minn. 1892
Lowry v. Akers 52 N.W. 922 Minn. 1892
The claim that Koon’s lien under the execution .sale was extinguished by satisfaction is made upon the decision of Sprague v. Martin, 29 Minn. 226 , ( 13 N. W. Rep.
Abraham v. Holloway 42 N.W. 867 Minn. 1889
Abraham v. Holloway 42 N.W. 867 Minn. 1889
1878, c. 66, § 326; Sprague v. Martin, 29 Minn. 226 , ( 13 N. W. Rep.