Beehler v. Fawcett Publications, Inc.
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 1937, 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
1 later published case cites this decision.
- Nelson v. Garden Valley Telephone Co. (Minn. 1937)
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
This is a libel action. Plaintiff sued for $50,000 damages. He had a verdict for $200. He appealed from an order denying his motion for a new trial. His motion was made on the grounds that the verdict was not justified by the evidence and was contrary to law and that errors occurred at the trial which were duly excepted to by him.
As there was a verdict in his favor, upon the state of the record, he cannot take advantage of the grounds claimed. For the first time in this court he urges that the verdict Avas given under passion and prejudice. That claim is not here available to him. G. S. 1923 (2 Mason, 1927) § 9325; English v. M. & St. P. S. Ry. Co. 96 Minn. 213, 104 N. W. 886; Moehlenbrock v. Parke, Davis & Co. 141 Minn. 154, 169 N. W. 541.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.