Legal Opinion

Farmers State Bank v. Anderson

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided November 22, 1935No. 30,490PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

I. M. Olsen, Justice.

Defendants S. J. i\nderson and Western Surety Company appeal separately from an order denying their motion to have the findings of fact and conclusions of law amended, or, if that be denied, then for a new trial.

The order, as far as it denies the motion to amend the findings of fact and conclusions of law made by the trial court, is not appeal-able, but errors in the findings and conclusions may be reviewed on appeal from the order denying the motion for a new trial, or, in a proper case, on appeal from the judgment. Taylor v. C. G. W. R. Co. 163 Minn. 46, 203 N. W. 434;…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Ganley v. City of PipestoneSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
  2. Barrett Bros. Co. v. County of St. LouisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
  3. New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. WurtzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
  4. First National Bank of Chisholm v. O'NeilSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
  5. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Federal Construction Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1926

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Western Casualty & Surety Co. v. LashSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1940
  2. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. HilkSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1973
  3. County of Audrain Ex Rel. First National Bank of Mexico v. WalkerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API