Hansen v. Gaar, Scott & Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Otter Tail county, Baxter, J., denying a new trial after a verdict for plaintiff for $475.66. The action was one for breach of a contract of warranty in the sal'e of a thresher and separator. The “November agreement” is given in the opinion upon the former appeal. See 63 Minn. 95.
1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.
On the first trial of this action it was dismissed when plaintiff rested. From an order denying his motion for a new trial an appeal was taken, and a new trial ordered. 63 Minn. 94, 65-N. W. 254. A second trial resulted in a verdict for plaintiff, and from an order refusing to grant defendant’s motion for a new trial an ap*69peal has been taken. Many of the assignments of error relate to rulings made below in strict accordance with the views expressed in the former opinion, and an attempt has been made in the argument to have the court overrule some of the conclusions there announced. We there…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hansen v. Gaar, Scott & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
3Cited by3 opinions
- Russell v. Sunburst Refining Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1928
- Boltz v. Town of SullivanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
- Muskogee Electric Traction Co v. RyeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915