Volume 285 — Minnesota Reports

<bold>Criminal law — burglary conviction — sufficiency of evidence</bold>. <block_quote> Evidence held sufficient to support verdict of guilty of burglary within the meaning of Minn. St. <cross_reference>609.58</cross_reference>, subd. 2(3).</block_quote>

<bold>Appeal and error — nonappealable order — findings of juvenile</bold> <bold>court referee</bold>. <block_quote> The appeal herein must be dismissed, as there has been no final order of the judge of the juvenile court from which an appeal may be taken.</block_quote><page_number>Page 185</page_number>

<bold>Workmen's compensation — injury not arising out of and in</bold> <bold>course of employment — violation of instruction</bold>. <block_quote> Injury of employee-relator while using a power jointer, though sustained on the premises of his employer during working hours, did not arise out of and in the course of employment within the contemplation of Minn. St. <cross_reference>176.021</cross_reference>, subd. 1, where the injury-provoking activity was in violation of a timely and specific instruction of the employer not to use the jointer, was activity which was not in furtherance of the employer's business, and was employee misconduct which could not be reasonably anticipated as a hazard of the employment environment.</block_quote>

<bold>Insurance — automobile liability insurance — action to</bold> <bold>establish coverage — admissibility of conversation</bold> <bold>pertaining to coverage</bold>. <block_quote> 1. Where, in an action against an insurance company to establish coverage under an insurance policy, the insured testifies to a conversation with a secretary at the office of the agency for the insurer, who confirms coverage under a motor vehicle liability policy, the conversation is neither lacking in foundation nor inadmissible hearsay.</block_quote> <bold>Same — action to establish coverage — recovery of attorneys'</bold> <bold>fees</bold>. <block_quote> 2. Where an insured is compelled to defend himself in an action because his insurer has erroneously denied its obligation to defend him under its liability policy, the attorneys' fees incurred in the defense of that action may be awarded the insured<page_number>Page 265</page_number> as contract damages in a subsequent action against the insurer; but, absent statutory authority or specific provision in the insurance contract itself, the insured may not otherwise recover attorneys' fees incurred in an action against the insurer to establish coverage under an insurance policy.</block_quote>

<bold>Zoning — rezoning — requiring consent of adjoining owner —</bold> <bold>constitutionality</bold>. <block_quote> The provisions of Minn. St. <cross_reference>462.357</cross_reference>, subd. 5, and St. Paul Legislative Code, § <cross_reference>64.06</cross_reference>, requiring the consent of adjacent owners as a condition to the rezoning of property which has not been the subject of a 40-acre survey, do not unlawfully delegate legislative authority to such property owners and are, therefore, constitutional.</block_quote>

<bold>Criminal law — postconviction proceedings — denial of relief</bold> <bold>— propriety</bold>.