St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1885-11-10
Supreme Court.

DECISIONS FILED.
Leonidas Merrett, respondent. VS.. The KNIFE
Falls Boom Company, appellant.
Syllabus-Section 3, chapter l06, Special
Laws, 1872, which fixes the rate of co:npen-
sation to be paid by the defendant to the sur
veyor general of logs for surveying logs com
ing within defendants boom (the rate being
less than that fixed by the general law, at
fects equally the interests and rights or all
owners of such logs, and is not liable to OBJ
lection as partial and unequal, SO as to be
unconstitutional. Order reversed
GILFILLAN, G. j.
West Publishing Company, respondent, VS..
j. B. Bottineau, appellant.
Syllabus-An act establishing the munich
pal court of the city of Minneapolis construed
as authorizing the court by rule to change a
prescribed form of process in actions OF
replevin so that jurisdiction of the person OF
the defendant might be acquired by the SerV-
ice Of summons as in the district court,
the writ of replevin adopted by the court
directing only in respect to the taxing ana
disposition of the property.
The Judgment is therefore affirmed.
DICKINSON, J.
c. N. Nelson Lumber Company, appellant,
VS.. Thomas Carney ct al, defendants, and
C. H. Pelan as garnishee, respondent.
Syllabus-An answer not containing new
NATTER but consisting only Of den1als OF
what is alleged in the complaint, is not sub
ject to demurrer. The order overruling the
demurrer is denied. DICKINSON, j.
Margaret Grotz respondent, VS.. j. A. wal
tiers, appellant.
Syllabus-A particular contract construed.
Judgment affirmed. GILFILLAN, G. j.
Matt Clark, respondent VS.. Q. n. Nelson Lum-
Der Company, appellant.
Syllabus-Rule that this court will not re-
verse an order setting aside verdict as
against the evidence unless the preponder-
ance of the evidence was manifestly and pal
Nohl fcxr NJ no ri
affirmed. GILFILLAN, u. ).
Lessor Franklin, respondent, VS.. James Stod-
dard, appellant. - ~
Syllabus-Where bet is made and stake
holder agreed on, but the property not placed
in his hands, he cannot take the property
from the loser and deliver it to the winner
unless authorized by the loser, otherwise than
by the bet. Order reversed.
GILFILLAN, G. J.
Felix Trainor, respondent, VS.. John A. Wour-
man, appellant.
Syllabus-Chapter 10, laws of 1883, abro-
gated the rule in the Mason u Crafty VS.. Hey
ward. 3 Minnesota, 1872, that defendant ad-
mits cause of action on the contract on
which the action is brought by pending
counter-claim on the same contract. Nhen
complaint on contract alleged full perform
ance according to its terms, and the answer
pleaded counter-claim upon an alleged fall-
ure to perform within the time, allegations in
the reply of valid excuse for such failure
are if intended to help the plaintiffs cause
of action, departure in pleading and II
properly objected to, as by request for in
struction to the jury, cannot aid plaintlf to
recover, but he may rely on them to prevent
a recovery by defendant on the counter
claim. Judgment reversed.
GILFILLAN, c. ].
OCTOBER TERM.
William Collins, appellant, VS.. W. NJ.
Bracket, and Laucrede Para, respondents;
argued and submitted.
State ex rel. J. K Mansfield VS.. The Mayor
of St. Paul; continued until this morning.