Legal Opinion · Dissent

Lee v. Zaske

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided November 20, 1942No. 33,146Published

1DissentStreissguth, Justice

To the extent that the majority opinion holds that the verdict is against the great preponderance of the evidence entitling plaintiff to a new trial, I am in full accord, but I must respectfully dissent from the direction remanding the case for trial on the issue of damages only.

Here neither party moved for a directed verdict during the trial. Had the verdict been in favor of plaintiff instead of defendants, we could not have granted judgment for defendants notwithstanding a verdict to the contrary, no motion for a directed verdict having been made. 3 Dunnell, Dig. & Supp. § 5079; Stewart v.…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Simmons v. FishMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
  2. Yazoo & M. V. R. v. ScottMississippi Supreme Court · 1914
  3. Martin v. Walter CourtneySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
  4. Messenger v. St. Paul City Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
  5. Skolnick v. GruesnerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1936

13 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