TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Neumann v. Edwards

IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY WILLIAM F. NEUMANN, UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 195, LAWS OF 1915 v. FRANK EDWARDS

Neumann v. Edwards, 178 N.W. 589 (Minn. 1920)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Minnesota · State Highest Courts
Decided
June 18, 1920
Docket
No. 21,924
Judges
Brown
Citations
178 N.W. 589146 Minn. 1791920 Minn. LEXIS 582
Disposition
Writ discharged.
Headnotes
Appeal from district court In statutory proceedings. 1. A final order or judgment of the district court, in special administrative or other nonjudicial proceedings coming to that court hy statutory appeal or other appropriate method of review, may he removed to the supreme court by appeal as in ordinary civil actions. In such cases certiorari will not lie. 2. Certiorari from the supreme court will not therefore lie in such cases.
Summary
The state commissioner of insurance having revoked the license of Frank Edwards to solicit insurance in the state of Minnesota, he appealed to the district court for Hennepin county, where the order of the commissioner was affirmed by Steele, J. To review the judgment affirming the order of the commissioner of insurance, he obtained a writ of certiorari from the supreme court.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Brown

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Brown, C. J.

The license of relator as an insurance agent, duly issued to him under the laws of the state, was, on March 8, 1920, under the authority conferred by chapter 195, § 6, p. 262, Laws 1915, duly revoked by the state insurance commissioner for the misconduct of relator in the exercise of rights conferred by the license. He appealed from the order of removal to the district court, as allowed and permitted by section 13 of that statute. After hearing and trial in the district court the action of the commissioner was in all things sustained and judgment, based upon findings of fact and conclusions of law, was formally entered to that effect on April 13, 1920. Thereupon relator sued out a writ of certiorari to review the same in this court.

The writ and proceedings in this court must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. It is well settled by our decisions that in special administrative or other nonjudicial proceedings reaching the district court by statutory appeal or otherwise, the final order or judgment of that court may be removed to the supreme court on appeal as in ordinary civil actions. 1 Dunnell, Minn. Dig. § 294; County of Ramsey v. Stees, 27 Minn. 14 , 6 N. W. 401 ; Witt v. St. Paul & N. P. R. Co. 35 Minn. 404 , 29 N. W. 161 , overruling Conter v. St. Paul & Sioux City R. Co. 24 Minn. 313 ; Moede v. County of Stearns, 43 Minn. 312 , 45 N. W. 435 ; Koochiching County v. Franson, 91 Minn. 404 , 98 N. W. 98 . It is also well settled that when in any particular case an appeal is given by law, that is the exclusive remedy and certiorari will not lie, 1 Dunnell, Minn. Dig. § 1395; State v. District Court of St. Louis County, 136 Minn. 461 , 161 N. W. 1055 . And although the evidence returned to this court sustains the decision below, we discharge the writ and dismiss the proceedings as without jurisdiction; which cannot be conferred by the consent of the parties. 3 Dunnell, Minn. Dig. § 9071; State v. Bashko, 127 Minn. 519 , 148 N. W. 1082 .

Writ discharged.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1924: 21931: 11934: 11942: 21951: 11982: 119242026peak 1924 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. State ex rel. Ging v. Board of Education7 N.W.2d 544 (Minn. 1942)
  2. Swanson v. Cross Lake Land Co.255 N.W. 812 (Minn. 1934)
  3. Kunze v. White Bear Lake Police Civil Service Commission319 N.W.2d 61 (Minn. 1982)
  4. Stebbins v. Friend, Crosby & Co.238 N.W. 57 (Minn. 1931)
  5. F. Tru. Sav. Bk. v. U.S. Fid. Guar. Co.200 N.W. 848 (Minn. 1924)
  6. Warner v. A. G. Anderson, Inc.3 N.W.2d 673 (Minn. 1942)

Most recent

  1. Kunze v. White Bear Lake Police Civil Service Commission319 N.W.2d 61 (Minn. 1982)
  2. Hamilton v. Boyce48 N.W.2d 172 (Minn. 1951)
  3. State ex rel. Ging v. Board of Education7 N.W.2d 544 (Minn. 1942)
  4. Warner v. A. G. Anderson, Inc.3 N.W.2d 673 (Minn. 1942)
  5. Swanson v. Cross Lake Land Co.255 N.W. 812 (Minn. 1934)
  6. Stebbins v. Friend, Crosby & Co.238 N.W. 57 (Minn. 1931)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 7

DepthCaseCited by
Moede v. Cnty. of Stearns, 45 N.W. 435 (Minn. 1890) 22
Witt v. St. Paul & Northern Pac. Ry. Co., 29 N.W. 161 (Minn. 1886) 15
Koochiching Co. v. Franson, 98 N.W. 98 (Minn. 1904) 11
State ex rel. Vill. of Buhl v. Dist. Court, 161 N.W. 1055 (Minn. 1917) 4
State ex rel. Va. & Rainy Lake Co. v. Bashko, 148 N.W. 1082 (Minn. 1914) 3
Cnty. of Ramsey v. Stees, 6 N.W. 401 (Minn. 1880) 2
Conter v. Saint Paul & Sioux City R.R., 24 Minn. 313 (1877) 9

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list