Conrad v. Bauldwin

Minnesota Supreme Court
Conrad v. Bauldwin, 44 Minn. 406 (Minn. 1890)
46 N.W. 850; 1890 Minn. LEXIS 379
Mitchell

Can I rely on this case?

Yes — no negative treatment found

Based on 1 citing opinion

Analysis generated from citing opinions in this archive. Not legal advice.

Conrad v. Bauldwin

Opinion of the Court

Mitchell, J.

Upon the trial, when the plaintiff rested his case, the court, on motion of defendants, dismissed the action, evidently, *407as appears from the record, upon the ground that the plaintiff hadl failed to establish a cause of action. The judgment entered uporc this order was one of dismissal merely, and not upon the merits» Gen. St. 1878, c. 66, § 262, subd. 3. Hence, under Gen. St. 1878,. c. 67, § 2, the defendants were only entitled to five dollars statutory-costs. The-cause is therefore remanded, with directions to the court-below to modify the judgment appealed from by deducting therefrom-five dollars. It is ordered, however, that the appellant shall not. recover any costs in this court.

Reference

Full Case Name
William S. Conrad v. Nelson M. Bauldwin and another
Cited By
2 cases
Status
Published