Legal Opinion

Kastner v. Dalton Development, Inc.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 7, 1963No. 38,889PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Frank T. Gallagher, Commissioner.

Appeal from an order of the district court denying plaintiff’s motion for amended findings or for a new trial.

At the outset defendant contends that this appeal is limited in legal effect to a consideration of the order denying a motion for a new trial. It is true that an order denying a motion to amend findings is not ap pealable, whether or not the motion includes an alternative motion for a new trial, but the error claimed is reviewable when properly presented on an appeal from an appealable order or judgment. Donarski v. Lardy, 251 Minn. 358, 88 N. W. (2d)…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Donarski v. LardySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1958
  2. Minar v. SkoogSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1951
  3. Peterson v. Johnson Nut Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1939
  4. Master Laboratories, Inc. v. ChesnutNebraska Supreme Court · 1951
  5. Minneapolis Baseball Co. v. City BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Koch v. Han-Shire Investments, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1966
  2. Fredrich v. Independent School District No. 720Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1991
  3. Nafstad v. MerchantSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
  4. State Bank of Rose Creek v. First Bank of AustinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  5. Fries v. FriesNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1991

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API