Case Name: Margaret Reagan vs. Walter Madden
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Minnesota
Decision Date: 1871-07
Citations: 17 Minn. 402
Docket Number: 
Parties: Margaret Reagan vs. Walter Madden.
Judges: 
Reporter: Minnesota Reports
Volume: 17
Pages: 402–403

Head Matter:
Margaret Reagan vs. Walter Madden.
A motion to be relieved .from a judgment made under sec, 105, ck. 66, Gen. Stat., within one year from the entry of judgment, is addressed to the discretion of the court in which the motion is made ; and, where there is no abuse of such discretion, the order granting such motion will not be reversed.
Appeal from an order of the district court for Scott county, the nature of which is .stated in the opinion.
L. M. Brown, for Appellant.
Henry Hinds, for Respondent.

Opinion:
By the Court.
McMillan, J.
This is an appeal from an order of the district court, setting aside a judgment entered by default, and permitting the defendant to answer, &c.
Judgment was entered for the plaintiff on the 27th of September, 1869. Notice of the motion to set aside the judgment was given on the 25th of October, 1869, and in the meantime executions had been issued and levied, and money made thereon by sale, &c. The motion was granted, and the judgment set aside, on the 13th of November, 1869.
The motion, having been made for relief from the judgment on the grounds specified in sec. 105 of ch. 66 of the Gen Stat. within one year from the entry of the judgment, was addressed to the discretion of the court and will only be reversed on the ground of abuse of discretion by the court below. Myrick vs. Pierce, 5 Minn. 65; Jorgenson vs. Boehmer et al., 9 Minn. 181. That, upon the facts shown upon the motion, we might have come to a conclusion different from that arrived at by the district court is not a sufficient reason for reversing the order. Without reviewing the facts it suffices to say that the case presented upon the motion-does not show that in granting the motion there was any abuse of discretion.
The order appealed from is therefore affirmed.