Opinion · Supreme Court of Minnesota
Dodge v. Bell
Dodge v. Bell, 37 Minn. 382 (Minn. 1887)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of Minnesota
- Jurisdiction
- Minnesota
- Date
- 1887-11-07
- Topic
- general
Gilfillan, C. J. The defendant demurred to the plaintiff’s complaint, and the demurrer was sustained. The plaintiff then made a motion that the court below vacate the order sustaining the demurrer, and “grant him a new trial.” This motion was denied, and from the order denying it the plaintiff appeals to this court. The order is not appealable.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Dodge v. Bell. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 14 opinions
The defendant demurred to the plaintiff’s complaint, and the demurrer was sustained. The plaintiff then made a motion that the court below vacate the order sustaining the demurrer, and “grant him a new trial.” This motion was denied, and from the order denying it the plaintiff appeals to this court.
The order is not appealable. It is not an order refusing a new trial, within the meaning of the fourth subdivision of section 8, chapter 86, Gen. St. 1878, giving a right of appeal! This subdivision must
Appeal dismissed.