Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Emmert v. Thompson, 52 N.W. 31.

43 citing documents.

In re the Receivership of United Prairie Bank, Respondent, vs. Molnau Trucking LLC, et al., Defendants, Granite Re, … Minn. 2025
In re the Receivership of United Prairie Bank, Respondent, vs. Molnau Trucking LLC, et al., Defendants, Granite Re, … Minn. 2025
Citizens State Bank v. Raven Trading Partners, Inc. 786 N.W.2d 274 Minn. 2010
Citizens State Bank v. Raven Trading Partners, Inc. 786 N.W.2d 274 Minn. 2010
See Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386, 391-92 , 52 N.W.
Ripley v. Piehl 700 N.W.2d 540 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Ripley v. Piehl 700 N.W.2d 540 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
See, e.g., Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386 , 52 N.W.
Carl H. Peterson Co. v. Zero Estates 261 N.W.2d 346 Minn. 1977
Carl H. Peterson Co. v. Zero Estates 261 N.W.2d 346 Minn. 1977
124 (1903); Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386 , 52 N.W.
Peterman-Donnelly Engineers & Contractors Corp. v. First National Bank 408 P.2d 841 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
Hayward v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 4 N.W.2d 316 Minn. 1942
Hayward v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 4 N.W.2d 316 Minn. 1942
Subrogation is “not dependent upon contract, privity, or strict surety.” Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386 , , A. S. R. 566; Northern Trust Co. v. Consolidated Elev.
First National Bank v. Schunk 276 N.W. 290 Minn. 1937
First National Bank v. Schunk 276 N.W. 290 Minn. 1937
Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386 , , 32 A. S. R. 566; Wentworth v. Tubbs, 53 Minn. 388 , ; Elliott v. Tainter, 88 Minn. 377 , ; 41 C. J. 582.
Hirleman v. Nickels 258 N.W. 13 Minn. 1934
Hirleman v. Nickels 258 N.W. 13 Minn. 1934
In Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386, 393 , , 32 A. S. R. 566, the court said: *57 “It is a common thing for courts of equity to relieve parties who have by mistake discharged mortgages upon the record, and to fully protect them from the consequences of their acts, when such relief will not result prejudicially to third or innocent person
Kingery v. Kingery 241 N.W. 583 Minn. 1932
Kingery v. Kingery 241 N.W. 583 Minn. 1932
The court held in Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386 , , 32 A. S. R. 566, that where at the request of the property owner such a loan and mortgage were made for the express purpose of taking up prior liens, and the lender expected and believed in good faith that his security would be substituted in fact in place of the liens discharged, he should be subrogat
Southern Surety Co. v. Tessum 228 N.W. 326 Minn. 1929
Southern Surety Co. v. Tessum 228 N.W. 326 Minn. 1929
Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386 , 52 N.W.
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. of Baltimore v. Citizens State Bank of Antelope 201 N.W. 431 Minn. 1924
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. of Baltimore v. Citizens State Bank of Antelope 201 N.W. 431 Minn. 1924
This is quite different from the case of Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386 , , 32 Am.
Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. St. Paul Gas Light Co. 188 N.W. 265 Minn. 1922
Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. St. Paul Gas Light Co. 188 N.W. 265 Minn. 1922
§ 9036; Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386 , , 32 Am.
New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Wurtz 177 N.W. 664 Minn. 1920
New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Wurtz 177 N.W. 664 Minn. 1920
Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386 , , 32 Am.
Northern Trust Co. v. Consolidated Elevator Co. 171 N.W. 265 Minn. 1919
Northern Trust Co. v. Consolidated Elevator Co. 171 N.W. 265 Minn. 1919
206; Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386 , , 32 Am.
Sucker v. Cranmer 149 N.W. 16 Minn. 1914
Sucker v. Cranmer 149 N.W. 16 Minn. 1914
Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386 , , 32 Am.
Ætna Life Insurance v. Flour City Ornamental Iron Works 139 N.W. 955 Minn. 1913
Ætna Life Insurance v. Flour City Ornamental Iron Works 139 N.W. 955 Minn. 1913
In Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386, 391 , , 32 Am.
Errett v. Wheeler 123 N.W. 414 Minn. 1909
Errett v. Wheeler 123 N.W. 414 Minn. 1909
Wadsworth v. Blake, 43 Minn. 509 , ; Emmert v. Thompson, 49 *165 Minn. 386 , , 32 Am.
Elliott v. Tainter 93 N.W. 124 Minn. 1903
Elliott v. Tainter 93 N.W. 124 Minn. 1903
Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386 , ; Heisler v. C. Aultman & Co., 56 Minn. 454 , ; London & N. W. Am.
Cleveland Iron Mining Co. v. Eastern Railway Co. 78 N.W. 84 Minn. 1899
Cleveland Iron Mining Co. v. Eastern Railway Co. 78 N.W. 84 Minn. 1899
See Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386 , ; Vega S. S. Co. v. Consolidated El.
London & Northwestern American Mortgage Co. v. Tracy 59 N.W. 1001 Minn. 1894
London & Northwestern American Mortgage Co. v. Tracy 59 N.W. 1001 Minn. 1894
*204 The case differs in several particulars from Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386 , ( .)
Heisler v. C. Aultman & Co. 57 N.W. 1053 Minn. 1894
Heisler v. C. Aultman & Co. 57 N.W. 1053 Minn. 1894
The doctrine of subrogation has recently been considered by this court in two cases: Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386 , ( ,) and Wentworth v. Tubbs, 53 Minn. 388 , ( .)
Wentworth v. Tubbs 55 N.W. 543 Minn. 1893
Wentworth v. Tubbs 55 N.W. 543 Minn. 1893
Neither is it found that, as in Emmert v. Thompson, 49 Minn. 386 , ( 52 N. W. Rep.