Daley v. Forsythe
South Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from circuit court, Pennington county. Hon. William Gardner, Judge. Action on grub-stake mining contract. Defendants had judgment, and from an order denying his motion for a new trial, plaintiff appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion. The motion for a new trial, upon the ground of newly discovered evidence, should have been granted.
Read the full summary
Appeal from circuit court, Pennington county. Hon. William Gardner, Judge. Action on grub-stake mining contract. Defendants had judgment, and from an order denying his motion for a new trial, plaintiff appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion. The motion for a new trial, upon the ground of newly discovered evidence, should have been granted. Gaines v. White, 1 S. D. 442. . The motion was properly denied, because the alleged newly-discovered evidence would not have changed the result. Gaines v. White, 1 S. D. 442; 1 Hayne, New Trial, 257, § 91; Grace v. Arthur, (Wis.) 45 N. W. 518.
1Opinion of the CourtHaney, J.
This action was tried by the court, and resulted in a judgment in favor of defendants. Notice of the decision was given March 19, 1895. March 29, 1895, plaintiff served notice of intention to move for a new trial, upon a bill of exceptions, designating the sixth and seventh statutory causes. No exceptions were settled, and December 31, 1895, plaintiff served a second notice of intention to move for a new trial, and notice of motion to strike out certain portions of the findings of fact. On January 8, 1896, these motions of plaintiff came on for hearing, together with a motion of defendants to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Daley v. ForsytheSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1896
3Cited by2 opinions
- Breeden v. MartensSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1907
- State v. AndreSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1900