Minnesota Supreme Court, 1890

Schmidt v. McCarthy

Schmidt v. McCarthy
Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided May 16, 1890 · Gilfillan
43 Minn. 288; 46 N.W. 239; 1890 Minn. LEXIS 186 (Minnesota Reports)

Counsel

Taylor, Calhoun & Rhodes, for appellant., Hubert Hansen, for respondent.

Schmidt v. McCarthy

Opinion of the Court

Gilfillan, C. J.

There is no merit in either assignment of error. Even had defendant been technically entitled, as a part of his cross-examination of the witness Mrs. McCarthy, to ask the questions which the court below excluded, it is apparent that he could not have been prejudiced by their exclusion. They were so manifestly immaterial that no conceivable answers that the witness might have made could in any way have affected the result.

Order affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.