Civil Appellate Practice in the Minnesota Court of Appeals by Laura S. Underkuffler

By Laura S. Underkuffler

Show description

Read Online or Download Civil Appellate Practice in the Minnesota Court of Appeals PDF

Similar social sciences books

Promoting Aboriginal Health: The Family Wellbeing Empowerment Approach

"Those people who've labored at the frontline of Aboriginal well-being for any size of time be aware of that underneath the outside truth of Aboriginal people's negative well-being results sits a deeper fact. it's in regards to the significance of social and emotional health, and the way this flows from a feeling of keep an eye on over one's personal lifestyles.

Extra info for Civil Appellate Practice in the Minnesota Court of Appeals

Sample text

W. 363 (1901). Compare Wojciak v. Anderson, 295 Minn. 2d 440 (1973) (where posttrial order granting new trial unless plaintiffs consented to remittitur included no time period within which plaintiffs were required to consent, appeal was required to be treated as refusal to accept reduced award and thus was attempt to appeal from an order granting a new trial, which is nonappealable). 47. See Kelsey v. I. , 262 Minn. 2d 90 (1962); Seorum v. Marudas, 216 Minn. W. 2d 779 (1944). In Kelsey, the supreme court did remand the order to the trial court with directions to advise the court of whether the order was based exclusively on errors of law and no other ground.

687 (1931). 61. Leary v. Graeff, 30 Minn. W. 395 (1883). 62. Board of County Comm'rs. v. McKellar, 92 Minn. W. 807 (1904). 63. See City of Chaska v. , 271 Minn. W. 2d 195 (1965). Initiation of Appellate Proceedings 39 dismiss for failure to state a clause on which relief can be granted, or which denies a motion for summary judgment, is appealable. 03 in its prior form represents a rejection of the more restrictive federal rule in the case of the certification of questions by the trial court. Under 28 United States Code section 1292(b), an interlocutory order of this type is appealable only if the trial court certifies it as involving a question that is important and doubtful, and if the court of appeals chooses to accept the appeal; both steps are required before an appeal is properly lodged.

2d 26, 29 (Minn. 1980). 48 Civil Appellate Practice subsequent proceedings, then the appeal must be taken within ninety days of the entry of the first judgment; a timely appeal taken from the second or amended judgment will be of no use, since an appeal from 1 03 that judgment does not preserve the issues sought to be reviewed. Thus, the timeliness of the appeal involves not only the taking of the appeal within the prescribed time period from the order or judgment, but also the taking of the appeal from the particular order or judgment that will preserve the issues desired.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.51 of 5 – based on 5 votes