Legal Opinion

State v. Faribault Waterworks Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 29, 1896No. Nos. 10,116-(54)PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Rice county, Buckham, J., denying a motion for a new trial.

1Opinion of the Court

COLLINS, J.2

It was said in County of Washington v. German-American Bank, 28 Minn. 360, 10 N. W. 21, that:

“There is no statute authorizing an appeal like the present from a tax judgment. The only mode of reviewing such judgments is upon a certificate or statement of the facts and of its decision, by the court below, in the manner prescribed by statute. G. S. 1878, c. 11, § 80.”

This language is pertinent in this case, which is an appeal from an •order denying a new trial after findings of fact and an order for judgment in favor of the state had been filed in proceedings to enforce the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. RandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
  2. County of Washington v. German-American BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1881

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. Several Parcels of LandNebraska Supreme Court · 1906
  2. State v. Griffith & SmithSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1904
  3. State ex rel. Kane v. District CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1904

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API