Dorwan v. City of Moorhead

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Dorwan v. City of Moorhead

121 N.W. 1134, 108 Minn. 523, 1909 Minn. LEXIS 753

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedJune 4, 1909

DocketNos. 16,113—(125)

StatusPublished

This text of 121 N.W. 1134 (Dorwan v. City of Moorhead) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dorwan v. City of Moorhead, 121 N.W. 1134, 108 Minn. 523, 1909 Minn. LEXIS 753 (Mich. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

Per CuRrAir.

In this action the plaintiff sought to recover the reasonable value of services alleged to have been rendered to' the city of Moorhead in the care of certain patients at the city hospital or pesthouse. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed from an order denying its motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial. The assignments of error question the correctness of certain rulings of the court at the trial and the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict.

We find nothing in the record which requires discussion. The evidence sustains the verdict, and no rulings made by the trial court were sufficiently prejudicial in their effect to justify a reversal. The order of the trial court is therefore affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per CuRrAir.

In this action the plaintiff sought to recover the reasonable value of services alleged to have been rendered to' the city of Moorhead in the care of certain patients at the city hospital or pesthouse. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed from an order denying its motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial. The assignments of error question the correctness of certain rulings of the court at the trial and the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict.

We find nothing in the record which requires discussion. The evidence sustains the verdict, and no rulings made by the trial court were sufficiently prejudicial in their effect to justify a reversal. The order of the trial court is therefore affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

121 N.W. 1134, 108 Minn. 523, 1909 Minn. LEXIS 753, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dorwan-v-city-of-moorhead-minn-1909.