Legal Opinion

Little v. Leighton

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided May 12, 1891PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal by defendant from the order of the district court for Lac qni Parle county, Brotan, J., presiding, (acting for the judge of the 12th district,) which is considered in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.

The practice followed in this case in the district court was so irregular, and the record in this court so confused, that it is a labor of some difficulty to determine just what this appeal is. As nearly as we can gather from the record, the following is the situation : After verdict for the plaintiff, the defendant caused a “case” to be settled containing all the evidence, except the note sued on and the certificate of its protest, and then moved for a'new trial, which was denied. He then made a motion to have the settled case amended, which was also denied. He subsequently asked for leave…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Barrett v. SmithSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
  2. Bennett v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
  3. Worrlein v. MaierSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
  4. In Re Guardianship of JausSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1936
  5. Kolb v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1949

2 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