Oelschlegel v. Chicago Great Western Railway Co.

73 N.W. 631, 71 Minn. 50, 1898 Minn. LEXIS 511
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedJanuary 4, 1898
DocketNos. 10,813-(173)
StatusPublished
Cited by31 cases

This text of 73 N.W. 631 (Oelschlegel v. Chicago Great Western Railway Co.) 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
Oelschlegel v. Chicago Great Western Railway Co., 73 N.W. 631, 71 Minn. 50, 1898 Minn. LEXIS 511 (Mich. 1898).

Opinion

COLLINS, J.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries plaintiff had a verdict. Upon a settled case defendant corporation moved to set aside the verdict, and that judgment be entered in its favor notwithstanding the same.

This appeal is from an order denying the motion. No motion was made in the court below for a new trial. The order is not appealable. It was so suggested in Eckman v. Lauer, 67 Minn. 221, 69 N. W. 893, and it was so held in St. Anthony v. Graham, 67 Minn. 318, 69 N. W. 1077. The only difference in the facts between the case last cited and the present is that there the motion was in the alternative, — for judgment, or for a new trial in case judgment was not ordered; the court denying the first, but granting the alternative, request, and the appeal being taken from that part of the order which denied the motion for judgment,— while here the motion was not in the alternative, but simply for an order for judgment, which was denied, whereupon defendant appealed. Of course there is no substantial difference in the facts.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Related

State ex rel. Junior College District of Sedalia v. Barker
418 S.W.2d 62 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1967)
Town of Burnsville v. City of Bloomington
115 N.W.2d 923 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1962)
State Ex Rel. Associated Master Barbers & Beauticians v. Eischen
86 N.W.2d 652 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1957)
Walker Reorganized School District R-4 v. Flint
303 S.W.2d 200 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1957)
Caswell v. Minar Motor Co.
60 N.W.2d 263 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1953)
Muggenburg Ex Rel. Muggenburg v. Leighton
60 N.W.2d 9 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1953)
In Re Dissolution of School District No. 33
60 N.W.2d 60 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1953)
State Ex Rel. Danielson v. Village of Mound
48 N.W.2d 855 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1951)
State Ex Rel. Lommen v. Gravlin
295 N.W. 654 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1941)
State Ex Rel. v. City Council of Benson
209 N.W. 3 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1926)
Town of Balkan v. Village of Buhl
197 N.W. 266 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1924)
School District No. 135 v. McConnell
184 N.W. 369 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1921)
State ex rel. Nordblum v. Burnquist
179 N.W. 371 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1920)
State ex rel. Hilton v. Village of Kinney
178 N.W. 815 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1920)
Hammer v. Narverud
171 N.W. 770 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1919)
Kommerstad v. Great Northern Railway Co.
146 N.W. 975 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1914)
State ex rel. Weatherly v. Birmingham Water Works Co.
64 So. 23 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1913)
J. R. Watkins Medical Co. v. McCall
133 N.W. 966 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1911)
Snow v. Village of Excelsior
132 N.W. 8 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1911)
Hodge v. Franklin Insurance
126 N.W. 1098 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1910)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
73 N.W. 631, 71 Minn. 50, 1898 Minn. LEXIS 511, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oelschlegel-v-chicago-great-western-railway-co-minn-1898.