Schultz v. Schneckenberger
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Hen-nepin county, Harrison, J., denying a motion for a new trial.
1Opinion of the CourtLewis, J.
Action by plaintiff to recover $60, due for rent. Defense, payment in part. .Verdict for plaintiff. Appeal by defendant from an order denying Ms motion for a new trial.
There are two assignments of error requiring notice: First. Does the evidence support the verdict. Second. Misconduct of counsel for plaintiff in Ms argument to the jury.
1. We have read the evidence, and conclude that it is sufficient to sustain the verdict.
2. It is unnecessary to consider the language of counsel referred to in the assignment. If it was worthy of any notice whatever on the part of the court, in the absence of a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Mykleby v. Chicago, St. P., M. & O. Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
3Cited by3 opinions
- Powell v. Standard Oil Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Ludwig v. SpicerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Anderson v. LarsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929