Matchan v. Phoenix Land Investment Co.
Can I rely on this case?
Yes — no negative treatment found
- —
- —
Analysis generated from citing opinions in this archive. Not legal advice.
Matchan v. Phoenix Land Investment Co.
Opinion of the Court
These proceedings, two in number, involve but one controversy and will be disposed of by this one order.
The appeal is by R. R. Betcher and First National Holding Company, a corporation, from an order denying their motion to vacate a judgment. It appears that both appellants were parties to the case as tried and decided below. The points they now urge in their attack upon the judgment could have been made by an appeal therefrom. Therefore, they cannot be reviewed by a motion to vacate the judgment. Gasser v. Spalding, 164 Minn. 443, 205 N. W. 374. In consequence the order denying the motion is not appealable, and the trial court was right in refusing to settle the case or approve an appeal bond.
The application for a writ of mandamus directing the district court of Hennepin county to settle a ease and approve a bond on appeal is denied and the appeal itself is dismissed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- George L. Matchan v. Phoenix Land Investment Company and Others. [Fn1]
- Cited By
- 5 cases
- Status
- Published