Burgraf v. Byrnes
Cited by
- Melin v. Stuart 141 N.W. 812 Minn. 1913
- Foster v. Coughran 129 N.W. 853 Minn. 1911
- Burgraf v. Byrnes 116 N.W. 838 Minn. 1908
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Wood v. Cullen 13 Minn. 394
- Burgraf v. Byrnes 94 Minn. 418
- In re Official Ballot for the General Election of November, 1906 99 Minn. 517
- Burgraf v. Byrnes 109 N.W. 1132
- 13 Minn. 398 not in our corpus
Opinion text
PER CURIAM. This cause was here on two former appeals. 94 Minn. 418 , 103 N. W. 215 ; 99 Minn. 517 , 109 N. W. 1132 . The first appeal involved the sufficiency of the complaint, and the second was from an order granting defendant a new trial on the ground of surprise and excusable neglect. It is now hereon plaintiff’s appeal from an order granting defendant a new trial on the grounds (1) of errors in law occurring at the trial, and (2) that the verdict for plaintiff was not justified by the evidence. The case requires no extended opinion. We discover no errors in the rulings of the court sufficient to justify a new trial, but a careful examination of the evidence leads to the conclusion that the order should not, within the rule of Hicks v. Stone, 13 Minn. 398 (434), be disturbed. Order affirmed.