Blied v. Barnard

Decided July 2, 1915

Supreme Court of Minnesota · decided 1915-07-02

After the decision in the former appeal reported in 126 Minn. 159, 147 N. W. 1095, defendant applied to the district court for Steele county for leave to serve a supplemental answer. From the order denying the application, Childress, J., defendant appealed.

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently May 1926

4 state decisions

Relies on Hanley v. Board of County Commissioners · Stromme v. Rieck · Itasca Cedar & Tie Co. v. McKinley

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Dismissed · Decided 1915-07-02

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1This case was before this court at the April, 1914, term, and .was remanded for a new trial unless defendant should consent to a reduction of the verdict. Blied v. Barnard, 126 Minn. 159, 147 N. W. 1095. As soon as the remittitur was filed in the lower court, defendant made an application to that court for permission to serve and file a supplemental answer which application was denied and he appealed from the order denying it. Such an order made before the trial is not appealable. Hanley v. Board of Co. Commrs. of Cass County, 87 Minn. 209, 91 N. W. 756; Stromme v. Rieck, 110 Minn. 472, 125 N. W. 1021; Itasca Cedar & Tie Co. v. McKinley, 129 Minn. 536, 152 N. W. 653.

¶2Appeal dismissed.