Legal Opinion

Hull v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided May 14, 1896No. Nos. 9801-(38)PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the (district court for Hennepin county, Russell, J., denying a motion for a new trial.

1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.

In the court below plaintiff’s counsel moved for .a new trial upon nearly all of the statutory grounds, but on argu*403ment here abandoned all but two; one of these being surprise which ordinary prudence could not have guarded against, and the other misconduct of a juror during the trial.

In disposing of the one first mentioned wre shall not undertake, for it is unnecessary, to formulate a rule for the government of trial courts where surprise is urged as a ground for a new trial, nor shall we express any opinion in respect to the rules which have been laid down by the courts as to what…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. State v. LauthOregon Supreme Court · 1905
  2. Hill v. McKayMontana Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Morehart v. FurleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
  4. Sward v. NashSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
  5. Dobrowoloske v. ParpalaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913

1 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