St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1890-10-07
SAINT PAUL.
TWO TO ONE.
Two Reversals and One Judgment
Affirmed by the Supreme Court.

Affirmed by the Supreme Court.
The supreme court yesterday handed
down these decisions. the last before
the beginning of the fall term. They
were:
Marguerite B. Reddlng, Administrative, re-
spondent, VS.. William A. Goodwin ct al,
appellants. Order refusing new trial re-
versed. DICKINSON, j.
Syllabus: Resolutions adopted or de-
claratonS made at a corporate meeting
are not evidence of the truth of matters
recited or declared as against persons
notmembers of the corporation. The ill.,
solvency of a corporation at particular
time is not shown by proof that several
weeks after that time it made a general
assignment for the benefit of creditors.
The price for which an assignee by in
solvent proceedings sold the property
of the aSslgnor is not conclusive proof
of the real value of the property in an
action not connected with the lnsolv
ency proceedings In an action to re-
cover damages for deceit as to the
condition of private corporation by
means of which the plaintiff was in
duced to purchase stock of the corpora
ton, the measure of damages is be-
tween the value of the stock and the
price for it. While the market value is
the assessment of damages, yet if it
be shown that the corporation was in
solvent it is not to be presumed that the
stock had a market value different from
its intrinsic worth, and the latter may
be shown as basis for the assessment
of damages.
Proof of admissions made either by
party to the action or else by stranger
is not admissible. In all action harg-
ing conspiracy between the defend
ants to defraud the plaintiff. evidence is
admissible on The part of one of the de-
PENDANTS that he never had any CONVEX
sation with the other upon the subject
of the alleged conspiracy. An estab-
lished patronage or custom in the sale
of goods (milk) may be of substantial
value. The question being whether the
general business of Il corporation was
prosperous, it is not error to exclude
an offer to prove that profit was de-
rived from certain part only of its
business. 1t appearing from the teSti-
mOny of diSinrereSted witness that the
defendants made 10 the plaintiff, de-
ceased since the commencement of the
action, the fraudulent representations
for which q recovery is sought, the de-
PENDANTS are not permitted, under the
statute, to testify that in the converse
ton with the deceased, referred to by
such witness. they made no such repre-
sensations. The admissions of the de-
PENDANTS that Oh June 1S and Aug. 2 the
corporations of which they were men,
bers was insolvent is prima facie evil
dence against them that it continued
to be so until the 18th Gay of August
following.
Mary A. Ryder, appellant, VS.. Nehemiah
Hulett ct al, respondents. Order affirmed.
DICKINSON, j.
Syllabus: A foreclosure sale under a
power of sale in q mortgage. of separate
tracts of land as one tract, is not void
but only vOidable.
The statute in force at the time of the
foreclosure regulates the procedures;
and the recording of certificate of sale
ten months after the sale held to be
compliance with the statute, which pre-
scribed no period of time within which
that should be done.
David Bronson ct 81, respondents, VS.. The
ST. Croix Lumber Company. appellants.
Judgment reversed and new trial granted.
DICKINSON, j.
Syllabus: An issue as to the title to
land in another state is to be deter
mined by the law of real property in the
A tax deed of lands in Wisconsin held
Tin accordance with the statutes of that
state and the decisions of the supreme
COURT to be conclusive evidence of title
in the grantee. after the lapse of the
statutory period of limitations, the land
being unoccupied but constructively (as
held by such deciSiols) in the possession
OF the grantee in the tax deed,