Klimes v. Hanek

252 N.W. 219, 190 Minn. 634, 1934 Minn. LEXIS 1008
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedJanuary 12, 1934
DocketNo. 29,641.
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 252 N.W. 219 (Klimes v. Hanek) 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
Klimes v. Hanek, 252 N.W. 219, 190 Minn. 634, 1934 Minn. LEXIS 1008 (Mich. 1934).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Action to recover the value of three promissory notes alleged to have been converted by defendant and appropriated to his own use. Plaintiff had a verdict for the full amount claimed by him. The appeal is from an order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial.

The issues were clearly ones of fact and for the jury. In a charge, the correctness of which is not questioned, the court properly submitted them. Plaintiff’s testimony and that of defendant were in many particulars in direct opposition. Plaintiff’s testimony had corroboration in all essential features. A recital of the facts is not necessary; neither the litigants nor the profession would benefit therefrom. No reversible errors occurred at the trial.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Nostdal v. County of Watonwan
22 N.W.2d 461 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1946)
Driessen v. Moening
294 N.W. 206 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1940)
Township of Normania v. County of Yellow Medicine
286 N.W. 881 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1939)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
252 N.W. 219, 190 Minn. 634, 1934 Minn. LEXIS 1008, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/klimes-v-hanek-minn-1934.