Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Bardwell v. Collins, 46 N.W. 315.

47 citing documents.

Gray v. Comm'r of Pub. Safety 918 N.W.2d 220 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Gray v. Comm'r of Pub. Safety 918 N.W.2d 220 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
See Bardwell v. Anderson , 44 Minn. 97 , 102, 46 N.W.
Nieszner v. St. Paul School District No. 625 643 N.W.2d 645 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Nieszner v. St. Paul School District No. 625 643 N.W.2d 645 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
See Bardwell v. Anderson, 44 Minn. 97, 103 , 46 N.W.
Gill v. Gill 152 N.W.2d 309 Minn. 1967
Gill v. Gill 152 N.W.2d 309 Minn. 1967
In Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , , 9 L. R. A. 152, 20 A. S. R. 547, the defendant was a resident of this state, personally within it, and could be found therein, and a statute purporting to authorize service upon such persons by publication was held unconstitutional.
O'NEIL v. Dux 101 N.W.2d 588 Minn. 1960
O'NEIL v. Dux 101 N.W.2d 588 Minn. 1960
5 Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , , 9 L. R. A. 152, 20 A. S. R. 547; 12 Am.
Schwartz v. First Trust Co. 52 N.W.2d 290 Minn. 1952
Schwartz v. First Trust Co. 52 N.W.2d 290 Minn. 1952
Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , , 9 L. R. A. 152; State v. Security Nat.
Thomas v. Hector Construction Co. 12 N.W.2d 769 Minn. 1943
Thomas v. Hector Construction Co. 12 N.W.2d 769 Minn. 1943
Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , 46 N.W.
Dimke v. Finke 295 N.W. 75 Minn. 1940
Dimke v. Finke 295 N.W. 75 Minn. 1940
Jur., Constitutional Law, § 573; Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97, 101 , , 9 L. R. A. 152, 20 A. S. R. 547; State ex rel.
Kalman v. County of Grant 209 N.W. 638 Minn. 1926
Kalman v. County of Grant 209 N.W. 638 Minn. 1926
Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , , 9 L. R. A. 152, 20 Am.
Phelps v. Consolidated Vermillion & Extension Co. 195 N.W. 923 Minn. 1923
Phelps v. Consolidated Vermillion & Extension Co. 195 N.W. 923 Minn. 1923
Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , , 9 L. R. A. 152, 20 Am.
Winne v. Lahart 193 N.W. 587 Minn. 1923
Winne v. Lahart 193 N.W. 587 Minn. 1923
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.
Sundquist v. Fraser 191 N.W. 931 Minn. 1923
Sundquist v. Fraser 191 N.W. 931 Minn. 1923
The constitutional or other authority for this drastic and arbitrary action is not pointed out, nor can it well be sustained on any theory of property rights and the protection thereof which the Constitution, the law of the land which hears before it condemns (Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , , 9 L. R. A. 152, 20 Am.
State v. Security National Bank 173 N.W. 885 Minn. 1919
State v. Security National Bank 173 N.W. 885 Minn. 1919
“There are certain fundamental rights which our system of jurisprudence has always recognized * * * one of these is notice before judgment in all judicial proceedings.” Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , , 9 L.R.A.
Roberts v. Roberts 161 N.W. 148 Minn. 1917
Roberts v. Roberts 161 N.W. 148 Minn. 1917
Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , , 9 L.R.A.
Swanson v. Campbell 151 N.W. 534 Minn. 1915
Swanson v. Campbell 151 N.W. 534 Minn. 1915
Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , , 9 L.R.A.
McClymond v. Noble 87 N.W. 838 Minn. 1901
McClymond v. Noble 87 N.W. 838 Minn. 1901
This court held in that case, distinguishing Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , , that *332 the action authorized by G-.
Town of Hinckley v. Kettle River Railroad 72 N.W. 835 Minn. 1897
Town of Hinckley v. Kettle River Railroad 72 N.W. 835 Minn. 1897
iately mailed, postage prepaid, to the office of the company, or to the president, secretary, or any director or officer of said corporation, as may appear or be ascertained by said secretary from the articles of incorporation on file in his office.” In support of their contention that this statute does not provide for due process of law, counsel for defendant rely greatly on Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , .
Easton v. Childs 69 N.W. 903 Minn. 1897
Easton v. Childs 69 N.W. 903 Minn. 1897
Barber v. Morris, 87 Minn. 194 , ; Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , .
Davis v. Board of County Commissioners 67 N.W. 997 Minn. 1896
Davis v. Board of County Commissioners 67 N.W. 997 Minn. 1896
It is not practicable to define the term “due process of law.” The general principles for determining in particular cases whether the procedure provided by the statute is or is not due process of law are stated in the case of Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , .
McNamara v. Casserly 63 N.W. 880 Minn. 1895
McNamara v. Casserly 63 N.W. 880 Minn. 1895
In Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , , this court held *346 that a statute which provided for service of the summons by publication on resident defendants who ‘can be found within the state in actions to foreclose mortgages or mechanics’ liens is unconstitutional, for the reason that such service is not due process of law.
Carlson v. Phinney 58 N.W. 38 Minn. 1894
Carlson v. Phinney 58 N.W. 38 Minn. 1894
That section was declared unconstitutional in Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , ( .)
State ex rel. Blaisdell v. Billings 57 N.W. 206 Minn. 1893
Carson v. Cochran 53 N.W. 1130 Minn. 1892
Carson v. Cochran 53 N.W. 1130 Minn. 1892
By holding that an action to foreclose a mortgage is a personal action, and not a proceeding in rent, as we did in Whalley v. Eldridge, 24 Minn. 358 , and Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , ( 46 N. W. Rep.
Smith v. Hurd 52 N.W. 922 Minn. 1892
Smith v. Hurd 52 N.W. 922 Minn. 1892
We think that section was wholly void under the decision in Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , ( 46 N. W. Rep.
Shepherd v. Ware 48 N.W. 773 Minn. 1891
Shepherd v. Ware 48 N.W. 773 Minn. 1891
This aspect of the question was not considered by this court in its reference to this class of actions in Bardwell v. Collins, 44 Minn. 97 , ( 46 N. W. Rep.