DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Cappis v. Wiedemann, 90 N.W. 368.

28 citing documents.

  • Sanders v. Boulevard Del., Inc. 152 N.W.2d 132 Minn. 1967
  • Sanders v. Boulevard Del., Inc. 152 N.W.2d 132 Minn. 1967
    2 Murray v. Wilson, 227 Minn. 365 , 35 N. W. (2d) 521 ; Cappis v. Wiedemann, 86 Minn. 156 , ; Olson v. Berg, 87 Minn. 277 , .
  • Ryan v. Griffin 62 N.W.2d 504 Minn. 1954
  • Ryan v. Griffin 62 N.W.2d 504 Minn. 1954
    9 Stewart v. Davenport, 23 Minn. 346 ; Grant v. Wagner, 87 Minn. 297 , ; Cappis v. Wiedemann, 86 Minn. 156 , ; 5 Dunnell, Dig.
  • Murray v. Wilson 35 N.W.2d 521 Minn. 1949
  • Murray v. Wilson 35 N.W.2d 521 Minn. 1949
    Cappis v. Wiedemann, 86 Minn. 156 , ; Olson v. Berg, 87 Minn. 277 , .
  • Northern Drug Co. v. Abbett 284 N.W. 881 Minn. 1939
  • Northern Drug Co. v. Abbett 284 N.W. 881 Minn. 1939
    Cummings v. Baars, 36 Minn. 350 , ; Cappis v. Wiedemann, 86 Minn. 156 , ; Oien v. St.
  • Taylor v. Chicago Great Western Railroad 206 N.W. 404 Minn. 1925
  • Taylor v. Chicago Great Western Railroad 206 N.W. 404 Minn. 1925
    Cappis v. Wiedemann, 86 Minn. 156 , ; Petruschke v. Kamerer, 131 Minn. 320 , 155 N. *268 W. 205; Kelly v. McKeown, 139 Minn. 285 , ; Peterson v. Township of Manchester, 162 Minn. 486 , .
  • Kelly v. McKeown 166 N.W. 329 Minn. 1918
  • Kelly v. McKeown 166 N.W. 329 Minn. 1918
    Cappis v. Wiedemann, 86 Minn. 156 , ; Olson v. Berg, 87 Minn. 277 , ; Parker v. Pine Tree Lumber Co. 89 Minn. 500 , ; Conan v. City of Ely, 91 Minn. 127 , .
  • Petruschke v. Kamerer 155 N.W. 205 Minn. 1915
  • Petruschke v. Kamerer 155 N.W. 205 Minn. 1915
    Nor may we consider errors in any ruling on the reception of testimony, unless an exception was taken at the time, since none are taken by the motion for a new trial (Cappis v. Wiedemann, 86 Minn. 156 , ), and cases cited in 2 Dunnell, Minn. Dig.
  • Ogren v. City of Minneapolis 141 N.W. 120 Minn. 1913
  • Ogren v. City of Minneapolis 141 N.W. 120 Minn. 1913
    We reiterate the rule, stated in Cappis v. Wiedemann, 86 Minn. 156 , , and in very many cases following it, that under Laws 1901, p. 121, c. 113, now R. L. 1905, § 4200, an assignment of error, based upon the charge, is not considered, unless an exception is taken at the trial, or there is a specification of error in the motion for a new trial.
  • Nye v. Kahlow 107 N.W. 733 Minn. 1906
  • Nye v. Kahlow 107 N.W. 733 Minn. 1906
    Cappis v. Wiedemann, 86 Minn. 156 , ; Parker v. Pine Tree Lumber Co., 89 Minn. 500 , ; Conan v. City of Ely, 91 Minn. 127 , .
  • Clark v. Thompson 101 N.W. 1133 Minn. 1904
  • Clark v. Thompson 101 N.W. 1133 Minn. 1904
    Following Cappis v. Wiedemann, 86 Minn. 156 , , and Olson v. Berg, 87 Minn. 277 , , we are upon this point limited to a consideration of the question whether the evidence is sufficient to sustain the verdict.
  • Cady v. Cady 97 N.W. 580 Minn. 1903
  • Cady v. Cady 97 N.W. 580 Minn. 1903
    Cappis v. Wiedemann, 86 Minn. 156 , ; Olson v. Berg, 87 Minn. 277 , .
  • Conan v. City of Ely 97 N.W. 737 Minn. 1903
  • Conan v. City of Ely 97 N.W. 737 Minn. 1903
    Cappis v. Wiedemann, 86 Minn. 156 , ; Olson v. Berg, 87 Minn. 277 , .
  • Parker v. Pine Tree Lumber Co. 95 N.W. 323 Minn. 1903
  • Parker v. Pine Tree Lumber Co. 95 N.W. 323 Minn. 1903
    Cappis v. Wiedemann, 86 Minn. 156 , .
  • Olson v. Berg 91 N.W. 1103 Minn. 1902
  • Olson v. Berg 91 N.W. 1103 Minn. 1902
    We construed Laws 1901, c. 113, dispensing with the necessity of taking exceptions on the trial of an action, in Cappis v. Wiedemann, 86 Minn. 156 , , where the correct practice was pointed out: In cases where exceptions are taken at the trial, parties may proceed as under the old practice, specifying the ground of the motion for the new trial generally, but rulings not excepted to can be taken advantage of only by proceeding in accordance with the