State v. Longyear Holding Co.
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 1961, 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
3 later published cases cite this decision.
- State v. Adams (Minn. 1957)
- Stottlemyer v. Kline (Md. 1969)
- Wurdemann v. Hjelm (Minn. 1961)
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
The assignments of error raise the identical questions presented on the former appeal from an order dénying defendants’ motion for a new trial. State v. Longyear Holding Co. 224 Minn. 451, 29 N. W. (2d) 657. Where an order denying a new trial has been affirmed on appeal, all questions that might have been raised therein are set at rest and cannot be raised on a subsequent appeal from the judgment. School Dist. No. 1 v. Aiton, 175 Minn. 346, 348, 221 N. W. 424, 425; Skog v. Pomush, 221 Minn. 11, 20 N. W. (2d) 530; 1 Dunnell, Dig. & Supp. § 398.
Hence, the decision on the former appeal is decisive here.
Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.