Koethe v. O'Brien

19 N.W. 388, 32 Minn. 78, 1884 Minn. LEXIS 89
Supreme Court of Minnesota·Decided May 15, 1884·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

By the Court. 1

This is an appeal from an order denying a motion for a new trial. The motion was made on the ground that the verdict was contrary to law and the evidence. The respondent here makes the objection that not only was no case or bill of exceptions allowed or signed by the judge, but the so-called “case” does not show that it contains the whole of the evidence on the issue or issues as to which it is claimed that the verdict is against the evidence. The objection is well taken. Henry v. Hinman, 21 Minn. 378 ; Abrahams v. Sheehan, 27 Minn. 401.

Order affirmed.

Footnotes

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

Koethe v. O'Brien, 19 N.W. 388, 32 Minn. 78, 1884 Minn. LEXIS 89 (Mich. 1884).

19 N.W. 388 (Koethe v. O'Brien) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Boright v. Springfield Fire & Marine Insurance
25 N.W. 796 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1885)