The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1902-05-09
Ramsey County.


A. E: Katz, Respondent, VS.. the American
Bonding & Trust Company Of Baltimore
City, Baltimore, Maryland, Appellant.
First-The plaintiff in an action in claim
and delivery executed thu usual bond, which
was conditioned that he would prosecute
the action with effect and pay to defendants
any sum that might for any cause be re-
covered against him. Defendants rebonded
the property; the cause proceeded to trial
and resulted in judgment that plaintiff take
nothing by the action and awarding to de-
PENDANT the costs and disbursements OF the
action but there was no formal adjudication
that the property be returned to him. In
this action, one to recover upon the BOND
for the failure of plaintiff to pay the judg-
ment for costs, it is held, % that the condi-
ton of the bond, that plaintiff will pay to
defendants any sum that shall for any cause
be recovered against him." sewers the costs
and disbursements OF the action, and the
surety on the bond is liable therefor; and,
(2) the fact that the judgment did not for
mally adjudge a return of the property to
defendant in no way affected his right of
recovery upon the bond for the costs and
disbursements awarded by the judgment
Second-The fact that a third person inter-
yened in the claim and delivery action, max
ing claim to the property involved therein,
did mot enlarge, diminish or in any way
change the obligations. or liability OF the
surety on the bond. r. = E.r:~ 80 J. ~. Z,
Order affirmed. e@@ Brown, J. .
..2 Pine County.
Bernard x Fitzpatrick Respondent, VS..
Simonson Brothers, Manufacturing Com
pany, Appellant
Frst-An allegation in the reply denying
each and every matter and thing in an an
swer contained, save as the same may have
been heretofore stated in the complaint, Is
sufficient to put in issue the traversable facts
of the answer, and is not vttiated by the ad-
dition of unnecessary conclusions OF law not
inconsistent with such general denial.
Second-C. 157, S. l.. 1897, authorizes de-
cree Of heirship upon the petition Of an heir
to AN estate where the same has not been
administered for five years after the death
of an intestate and provides for final judy
ment that is conclusive upon all parties IN
.terested. ..
Thtrd-The decree Of heirship provided for
in such act is within the exercise of the au-
thority delegated to probate courts by Sec.
7, Art. Of the state constitution, which
limits their jurisdiction to the "estates OF
deceased persons and Of persons under guar
dianship.'' &@-
Fourth-The words 'when any person shall
die intestate" in Sec. 5, Chap. 157. G. L.,
1897, are to be construed literally and the
act hold TO apply to estates where the de-
its enactment.
Fifth-The clerk of the probate court of
Ramsey county is authorized to authenti-
cate and certify copies Of the records OF such
court and the use Of its seal upon a certif-
| cate in proper form for that purpose entitled
| the same to use as evidence.
Judgment affirmed. Lovely, J.
St. Louis County.
William Kelso, appellant, VS.. Oscar Young
| gren, respondent.
| /. Property in custody of the law, when
not exempt from execution. and taken by ar
| officer under writ In due form, issued by 9
! court Of competent jurisdiction. cannot be
| replevied from such officer by the defendant
or any one claiming title under him, subse'
quent to the levy Of the execution.
2. A referee appointed under section 1891
general statues 1894, to report judgment, does
not lose jurisdiction OF the case by the mere
| fact of fling his findings Of fact and con,
illusions Of law, with order for Judgment
and he had authority to revise and amend his
| findings of fact and conclusions OF law, pos
sessed by trial court, until Judgment hal
been entered or until he has been removed
as such referee by the court. Order affirmed
| Lewis, ].
Ramsey County.