Mattfeld v. Nester, 32 N.W.2d 291 (1948)

Citation: Mattfeld v. Nester, 32 N.W.2d 291 (1948)
Parent Document: Mattfeld v. Nester, 32 N.W.2d 291 (1948)
Jurisdiction: Minnesota (state)
Effective Date: 1948-04-16
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3533510/mattfeld-v-nester/ ↗

Full Text

980 chars

In making a choice here between the rule allowing the husband to recover in cases like this the expenses of his wife’s burial and the one denying such right, we should be guided by the rule that the common law is not in force in this state where the reasons for it have ceased to exist or it is not adapted to conditions existing here. 1 Dunnell, Dig. & Supp. § 1503. In Rye v. Phillips, 203 Minn. 567, 569, 282 N. W. 459, 119 A. L. R. 1120, we overruled and rejected as a “museum piece of the law” the common-law rule that a new consideration is necessary to sustain a debtor’s promise to accept something less than is due upon a liquidated debt in satisfaction thereof, which we already had adopted and followed, for the sole reason that the old rule was not sustained by sound reason. We there said (203 Minn. 570, 282 N. W. 460): “There is more than one ground of logic and good law upon which this old and indefensible rule may be discarded.” Reasons adequate for reject *136

Other Sections in This Document (117)

Full Text