cl-8009701
Precedential
Affirmed
Processed
Smith v. Harmon
Cited by
- Reyburn v. Minnesota State Board of Optometry 78 N.W.2d 351 Minn. 1956
- Walker v. Corwin 300 N.W. 800 Minn. 1941
- Minnesota State Board of Medical Examiners v. Schmidt 292 N.W. 255 Minn. 1940
- Eberle v. Miller 212 N.W. 190 Minn. 1927
- Mingo v. Holleran 191 N.W. 416 Minn. 1922
- State v. Women's & Children's Hospital Ass'n 184 N.W. 1022 Minn. 1921
- G. O. Miller Telephone Co. v. Minimum Wage Commission 177 N.W. 341 Minn. 1920
- State ex rel. Dybdal v. State Securities Commission 176 N.W. 759 Minn. 1920
- State ex rel. Landon v. Anding 155 N.W. 1048 Minn. 1916
- State ex rel. Young v. Standard Oil Co. 126 N.W. 527 Minn. 1910
- State ex rel. Johnson v. Brown 126 N.W. 408 Minn. 1910
- State v. Creamery Package Manufacturing Co. 126 N.W. 126 Minn. 1910
Opinion text
Gilfillan, C. J. The application to set aside the judgment and for leave to answer was addressed to the discretion of the court below. There is no pretence for saying that there was any abuse of discretion, and the order appealed from must be affirmed.