Minnesota Supreme Court, 1934

Howard v. Village of Chisholm

Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided March 23, 1934 · <italic>PER CURIAM</italic>.

253 N.W. 768; 191 Minn. 250; 1934 Minn. LEXIS 761 (North Western Reporter)

Counsel

Rosemeier Montague , for appellant. Frank M. Talus , for respondent.

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 1934, 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.

In re Estate of Rice (Minn. 1934)

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

PER CURIAM.

The damages herein awarded were adequately proved, and hence the order is affirmed for the reasons stated in the opinion this day filed in Howard v. Village of Chisholm, 191 Minn. 245, 253 N. W. 766.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.