Bruce v. Cohn
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.
In this action for personal injuries, a verdict was directed for defendants on the ground of contributory negligence. Solely because he .considered that error, the learned trial judge granted plaintiff’s motion for a new trial by an order of December 9, 1926. On December 11, by an order to show cause why the order granting the new trial should not be vacated, a reargument of the motion for a new trial was in effect ordered. That reargument was set for December 17. The result was an order denying the motion to vacate the order granting a new trial, and the appeal is from that order.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Provinsal v. PetersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1918
- United States Roofing & Paint Co. v. MelinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
- Chinander v. DelaittreSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
- Yorek v. PotterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Pach v. Chippewa Springs CorporationSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
3Cited by8 opinions
- Halliday v. RaymondNebraska Supreme Court · 1946
- Heikkinen v. CashenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
- Bennett v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
- Olson v. EvertSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1947
- Johnson v. KruseSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1939
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.