State v. Longyear Holding Co.
Minnesota Supreme Court
State v. Longyear Holding Co., 35 N.W.2d 291 (Minn. 1948)
227 Minn. 255; 1948 Minn. LEXIS 666
PER CURIAM.
Can I rely on this case?
Yes — no negative treatment found
Analysis generated from citing opinions in this archive. Not legal advice.
State v. Longyear Holding Co.
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.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- State v. Longyear Holding Company and Others. North Star Iron Company of West Virginia and Others, [Fn1] , [Fn2]
- Cited By
- 4 cases
- Status
- Published