Legal Opinion
Krocak v. Krocak
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided June 23, 1933No. 29,473PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HILTON, Justice.
Defendant appeals from an order denying his alternative motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial.
At the close of plaintiff’s case defendant’s motion to dismiss the action was denied. He did not move for a directed verdict at the close of the testimony. Not having so done in compliance with the statutory condition precedent (2 Mason Minn. St. 1927, § 9495) to the granting of a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, the appeal is confined to that portion of the order denying his motion for a new trial. Wilcox v. Wiggins, 166 Minn. 124, 207 N. W.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Kinzel v. Boston & Duluth Farm Land Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
- Johnson v. HeglandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
- Lufkin v. HarveySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
- Timmins v. PfeiferSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1930
- Wilcox v. WigginsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
3Cited by4 opinions
- Roberge v. Cambridge Cooperative Creamery Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
- Dutcher v. LewisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1974
- Wilcox v. SchlonerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1946
- Raspler v. SengSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943