County of Renville v. City of Minneapolis
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Per Curiam.
This is an appeal from an order directing judgment upon the pleadings in defendant’s favor. The order is not appealable, and this court is therefore without jurisdiction. We could not enter upon a consideration of the merits of this case without overruling a well-established rule, as shown by a long line of decisions of this court. Lamb v. McCanna, 14 Minn. 385 (513) ; Rogers v. Holyoke, 14 Minn. 387 (514); Hodgins v. Heaney, 15 Minn. 142 (185); Lockwood v. Bock, 46 Minn. 73 , 48 N. W. 458 . In U. S. S. L. & B. Co. v. Ahrens, 50 Minn. 332 , 52 N. W. 898 , it was said: “The point is not made by counsel for respondent, but, following the uniform practice of this court under like circumstances, the appeal is hereby dismissed.” See also Gottstein v. St. Jean, 79 Minn. 232 , 82 N. W. 311 .
The appeal is therefore dismissed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 5 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.