Legal Opinion

Houck v. Hult

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided March 16, 1931No. File No. 6801PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

'CAMFBEEE, J.

The above-entitled action was tried to the court without a jury, and findings, conclusions, and judgment were in favor of plaintiff. Thereafter defendants gave notice of intention to move for a new trial, which notice of intention stated that the motion would be “upon the following grounds,” and then proceeded to specify generally each of the causes set forth in section 2555, R. C. 1919, for the granting of a new trial, excepting only the causes specified in subdivisions 2 and 3 of said section, being *183misconduct of the jury and accident or suprise which ordinary prudence could…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Gamble v. KeyesSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Larsen v. JohnsonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1920
  3. Corsica State Bank v. HeezenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Plucker v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1925
  5. Norman v. MillerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1918

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Aschoff v. Mobil Oil Corp.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Houck v. HultSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Houck v. HultSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Museus v. GeyerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Hylland v. LawrensonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1951

6 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