St. Cloud Common Council v. Karels

Minnesota Supreme Court
St. Cloud Common Council v. Karels, 55 Minn. 155 (Minn. 1893)
56 N.W. 592; 1893 Minn. LEXIS 168
Buce

Can I rely on this case?

Yes — no negative treatment found

Based on 3 citing opinions

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

St. Cloud Common Council v. Karels

Opinion of the Court

Buce, J.

The motion of the respondent to dismiss the appeal in this action must be sustained. The action was commenced before a justice of the peace. Issue was joined, and plaintiff recovered judgment against Mary Karels for $15 and costs. She appealed to the district court upon questions of law alone. There the judg*157ment of tbe justice’s court was affirmed. She tbeu moved for a new trial in tbe district court, where tbe motion was denied, and sbe appeals to tbis court from tbe order denying a new trial. Such an order is not appealable. Dodge v. Bell, 37 Minn. 382, (34 N. W. Rep. 739.)

(Opinion published 66 N. W. Rep. 592.)

Appeal dismissed.

Reference

Full Case Name
St. Cloud Common Council v. Mary Karels
Cited By
3 cases
Status
Published