*1 EDITH SKILLINGS A. F. ALLEN.1 21,362.
No. Case followed. "Wingcounty $1,000. Action in the for district court Crow to recover De- complaint overruled, J„ McClenahan, fendant’s demurrer and the questions presented by important the demurrer certified and doubtful. overruling demurrer, appealed. From Affirmed. appellant. O’Brien, O. D. & R. D. respondents. Kinder,
A. D. Polls and L. B. overruling complaint from an order demurrer interposed stated no cause of action. The court certi- question important fied that the raised was and doubtful. (brought by This action was the wife of the in the casе of Bert B. Skillings presents Allen, supra, page 323, questions the identical which adversely tions which were decided in that BAER
HOMER C. WASECA MILLING COMPANY.2
April 17, 1919. Foreign corporation of stock lien of compel a Action to South Dakota authorized do business transfer on its books certain shares of stock they whom were issued. an- which the court had no swer matter, plaintiffs assignor defense that another stock, by-laws adopted virtue of the South Dakota statute and pursuant thereto, defendant had a lien all the until it stock could until had be transferred been
1Reported 2Reported 173 N. W. MINNESOTA granted plaintiff’s motion all liens The trial court for in. full and satisfied. allegation to set out definite and certain and to make this passage, allowed and defendant was referred to in full and the date of their days the date to amend set appealed. passage. Held-. From *2 specify be in case did not what would done While the order (1) it ground obeyed, the court would be sufficient not such disobedience allegations from or bаr from the answer to the indefinite strike introducing testimony support the merits in them. that would involve As Lovering action, appeаlable v. Webb order is within the doctrine the Publishing 201, N. 108 Minn. Co. (2) there was If it to the existence of requiring to in set forth its substance and abuse of disсretion (3) in a a transferee of stock not involve the exercise of visitatorial or relief asked does involves of the internal affairs of a to whom citizen of who has stock from one whether to on the books a issued have it transferrеd foreign corporation duly licensed to do in Minnesota. of the stock If there seller due. fo,r lien, protect a can and enforce the which it has the Minnesota courts the holder same of the‘stock. Ramsey county the district court fоr to defendant to issue transfer certain shares books and requiring certificates motion for therefor. Plaintiff’s an order thе answer by-laws made to be more definite certain and referred to therein be thereof, granted by Michael, set out as well Re- J. spondent’s appeal was denied. Affirmed. Moonan, Moonan & Oppenheimer Moore, respondent. Peterson, & plaintiff’s motion the made an order On court dеfendant make by setting definite certain its answer more words or sub- stance the a lien on the under which asserted controversy. appealed from Defendant moves ground appealable. is not dismiss order refusing require pleading An made morе order be definite and Kingdom appealable. American Book Co. v. Pub. 71 Minn. certain Co. O'Brien, 6, 1089; N. 1135. An 85 W. order State v. 73 W. certain, providing pleading made more definite and to be certain, p’eading shall out unless made definite be stricken Co., Lovering appealable. Minn. v. Webb Pub. distinguished latter there considered from 911. This case order N. W. prior ground in effect in the cases thаt was considered the orders striking pleading merits and therefore involved the an order provision instant makes no situation The order case action. obey to' event of failure it. But a failure com would exist ply be a for the to strike the order sufficient court with the would introducing answer, allegations bar defendant from indefinite Cyc. Lipman Bechhoefer, support 651; thеm. 31 evidence may produce same result as order opinion cited, that it within the in the case and we are doctrinе of involving dis merits. The motion to is denied. miss following July opinion On filed: *3 Curiam. Per against a South authorized to do Dakota upon cоrporation state, transfer of the books of cer- purchased tain shares of alleged corporation hud issued the same. whom the jurisdiction court had of the matter of the ac- plaintiff’s assignor that further defense as a tion. And par by stock; $10,000; value was and “under and that its virtue by-laws passed pursuant Dakota and the state of South of the statute a lien has all the stock until the same the defendant thereto be or said no stock can full and company moved that for in full all liens satisfied.” Plaintiff -until and part quoted referred more definite and certain and the be made passage to, The court be set аs the of the thereof. well granted required days from the date motion and defendant within -answer, setting an amendment either servе passage. The referred the date of its words substance appeal is from this order. large- pleading to
Orders be made rest more definite and certain ly Young Lindquist, discretion the trial court. o,f N. W. 455. If it be there existence surely was no abuse of forth discretion in defendant to set 143 MINNESOTA
substance that a transferee of has The case Guilford v. Western Union Tel. Co. 59 Minn. 61 N. W. it, propоsition as we read sustains that the courts of this state have grant by plaintiff. the relief asked The relief does not involve the еxercise of visitatorial or the of the internal corporation. state, affairs involves whether a citizen of this who stоck from one whom the has issued entitled to have it transferred books of the The cor- poration duly to do licensed business in this state. there If thereon, due the from the seller of the stock which a lien difficulty protecting enforcing courts of this state should have no the same as the holder of the stock. FARIBAULT PACKING & PRODUCE COMPANY O. O.
STORLIE.1 Dismissal followed. grounds justified Motion for new trial on the that the verdict wаs not law, evidence; granted, errors in but the silent order was grounds Appeal on the therefor. granted Lyons, authority of Heide —grant Appeal giving error trial without reason effect of.new statute. presume effect G. S. court shall not Section grоund thereof, new trial which is silent as to granted justified by evidence, .that the verdict *4 permitted presump- intended abolish a rule of the court such determining It can have no effect tion. character order. trial. to dismiss an
Motion 1Reported in 173 N. 400.W.