Minnesota Supreme Court, 1886

Coleman v. Reierson

Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided December 18, 1886 · Ilfillan

36 Minn. 222; 30 N.W. 811; 1886 Minn. LEXIS 295 (Minnesota Reports)

Counsel

Joseph McKnight, for appellant., Johnson á Pierce, for respondent.

Can I rely on this case?

Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.

(as of 9/30/2026)

Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1903, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.

Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

G-ilfillan, C. J.

To enable this court to consider the objection that the evidence does not sustain the verdict, it is necessary for the settled statement of the case to show that it contains all the evidence .on the matter as to which it is objected that the evidence is insufficient. This may appear either from the judge’s certificate or in the body of the “case.” Here there is contained in it a statement or certificate signed by the official reporter that the case contains all the .evidence. This statement became a part of the case by being left in *223'when settled. The evidence is not entirely satisfactory; but we think it was such that the jury might, in the fair exercise of their judgments, .arrive at the verdict found by them.

Order affirmed.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.