The only question presented for consideration in this case is whether the evidence is sufficient to justify the verdict. No exceptions were taken on the trial in the court below, and no errors in law are urged or relied upon. Our examination of the evidence leads to the conclusion that it is not so clearly and palpably against the verdict as to justify a reversal, and the order appealed from is affirmed.
92 Minn. 10
GUSTAV ELIASON v. JOHN HERMAN.1
April 15, 1904.
Nos. 13,779—(35).
Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Chippewa •county, Qvale, J., denying a motion for a new trial, after a trial and verdict in favor of plaintiff for $29.
Affirmed.
C. D. Bensel, for appellant.
Oluf Gjerset, for respondent.
Eliason v. Herman
92 Minn. 10
Case Details
92 Minn. 10
References
Nothing yet... Still searching!
Nothing yet... Still searching!