Legal Opinion
Senf v. Bolluyt
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided February 23, 1988No. C9-87-1106PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CRIPPEN, Judge.
Michelle Senf appeals from an order denying her motion for a new trial and her alternative motions. She alleges: (1) the trial court erred in refusing to reconvene the jury for a Schwartz hearing; (2) the court erred in not providing findings denying her motion; and (3) the court erred in denying a new trial because there was a substantial ambiguity in the verdict form. Respondents filed motions for attorney fees on appeal.
FACTS
Appellant brought a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries she sustained in an automobile accident. Prior to trial, the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Alholm v. WiltSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
- Barnes v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1951
- Bianchi v. NordbySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
- Bauer v. Kummer Ex Rel. KummerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
- Frank v. FrankCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
3Cited by3 opinions
- Covey v. Detroit Lakes Printing Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992
- Baker v. Amtrak National Railroad PassengerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1999
- Senf v. BolluytCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1988