Legal Opinion

United States Roofing & Paint Co. v. Melin

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided November 14, 1924No. 24,125PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilson, C. J.

An order denying a motion to vacate an order striking out an answer as sham is appealable, but the motion to vacate must be made returnable before the expiration of the time to appeal from the original order.

If the original order was nonappealable then the order denying a motion to vacate is nonappealable. Security State Bank v. Brecht, 150 Minn. 502, 185 N. W. 1021. But here the original order was appealable.

The motion asking that the prior order striking out the answer be vacated and allowing defendant to file an amended answer was addressed to the discretion of the trial court and, in…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Security State Bank v. BrechtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1921

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Bennett v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
  2. Bruce v. CohnSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
  3. Johnson v. KruseSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1939
  4. Simons v. CowanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
  5. Thompson v. Chicago & North Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1929

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