My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_01570
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF1000 - PF1999
>
1500-1599
>
pf_01570
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/22/2024 8:46:01 AM
Creation date
2/22/2024 8:42:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
1570
Planning Files - Type
Rezoning
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
97
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
instructions, and the like are subject to review only if those <br />matters were assigned as error in a motion for new trial. Heise <br />v. J.R. Clark Co., 71 N.W.2d 818 (1955). <br />Although some older case language suggested that the above - <br />stated rules might be flexible, see LeMay v. Minneapolis Street <br />Railway co., 71 N.W.2d 826 (1955) ("(Olur decisions are not <br />uniform as to what may be reviewed on appeal from a judgment <br />where there has been no motion for a new trial . . . "), the <br />supreme court has recently reaffirmed the general rule that a <br />motion for new trial must be made in order to preserve issues <br />arising during the course of trial. Sauter v. 'Wassemiller, 389 <br />N.W.2d 200 (Minn. 1986). Of course, any predicates to making a <br />ne4 trial motion, such as making timely objection, muss`, also be <br />satisfied before review will be permitted. Id. The rationale <br />behind the rule is to allow the trial court an opportunity to <br />correct its own errors without the time, expense and inconve- <br />nience of an appeal. Id. at 201-202. <br />Similarly, where the arinl court has neglected to make,, <br />findings on an issue, the absence of findings cannot be reviewed <br />on appeal unless it was brought tc the trial court's attention. <br />Metro <br />Federal <br />Savings <br />6 Loan Association v. <br />Adamsp <br />356 <br />N.W.2d 415 <br />(Minn. <br />App. <br />1984). <br />The party depending <br />upon <br />the <br />"missing" <br />findings for its cause of action or defense should request the <br />court to make amended or additional findings. The prosper motion <br />is one for amended or additional findings, not for new trial. <br />Rock_ ey v. Meyers, 158 N.W. 787 (1916). In both Metro and Rocke , <br />the appellants were defendants against whom the court entered <br />C <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.