Taylor v. Chicago Great Western Railroad

203 N.W. 434, 163 Minn. 46, 1925 Minn. LEXIS 1190
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedApril 17, 1925
DocketNo. 24,652.
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 203 N.W. 434 (Taylor v. Chicago Great Western Railroad) 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
Taylor v. Chicago Great Western Railroad, 203 N.W. 434, 163 Minn. 46, 1925 Minn. LEXIS 1190 (Mich. 1925).

Opinion

Quinn, J.

Action to recover loss sustained on a carload of apples, by reason of a decline in the market, at Kenyon, this state, during the time the same was unreasonably delayed in transit. The cause was tried and submitted to the court for decision. Findings of fact and conclusions were made and filed in favor of the plaintiff. Defendant moved for amended findings, which motion was denied. From the order denying such motion, defendant attempted to appeal.

No extended remarks are necessary in disposing of the matter. We again call attention to the rule that an order, denying a motion for amended findings, is not appealable. Lamprey v. St. P. & C. Ry. Co. 86 Minn. 509, 91 N. W. 29; Nikannis Co. v. City of Duluth, 108 Minn. 83, 121 N. W. 212; Desaman v. Butler Bros. 118 Minn. 198, 136 N. W. 748; Rees v. Nash, 142 Minn. 260, 171 N. W. 781; Nash v. Kirchoff, 161 Minn. 409, 201 N. W. 617.

The appeal is dismissed.

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

Related

Farmers State Bank v. Anderson
263 N.W. 443 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1935)
Louis F. Dow Co. v. Bittner
241 N.W. 569 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1932)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
203 N.W. 434, 163 Minn. 46, 1925 Minn. LEXIS 1190, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-chicago-great-western-railroad-minn-1925.