Legal Opinion

State v. Riley

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 24, 1942No. 83,170PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

1 Reported in 7 N.W.2d 770. This is an appeal from an order denying the appellant's motion for amended findings of fact and conclusions of law or for a new trial. An order denying a motion for amended findings or conclusions is not appealable. The court's denial of such a motion amounts to findings to the contrary. Herman v. Kelehan,212 Minn. 349, 3 N.W.2d 587; Smith v. Benefit Assn. of Ry. Employees, 187 Minn. 202, 244 N.W. 817. When such a motion is blended with a motion for a new trial and is denied as a whole, the order denying the new trial is appealable. This is another way of…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. O'Leary v. WangensteenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
  2. Smith v. Benefit Assn. of Railway EmployeesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
  3. Olsen v. HoffmannSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
  4. Sheffield v. CliffordSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
  5. Johnson v. HeglandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Seabloom v. KrierSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1945
  2. Hoverson v. HoversonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
  3. State v. PahlSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1960
  4. State v. QuinnellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1967
  5. Droege v. BrockmeyerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943

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

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

Powered by the Exa API