Billson v. Lardner

• Citation: 67 Minn. 35,69 N.W. 477
• Parties: BILLSON v LARDNER ET AL.
• Decision Date: 24 December 1896
• Court: Supreme Court of Minnesota (US)

67 Minn. 35

69 N.W. 477

BILLSONvLARDNER ET AL.¹

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Dec. 24, 1896.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

1. The case of Wolf v. McKinley (Minn.) 68 N. W. 3, followed.

2. The trial court made findings of fact and an order thereon, and subsequently, by agreement of the respective parties, it made additional findings and an order thereon, and filed the same. Held, that the last order must be deemed the final one in force, and that an appeal might be taken therefrom within 30 days, after written notice of the same.

Appeal from district court, St. Louis county; Page Morris, Judge.

Action by William W. Billson against William P. Lardner and others. From a judgment, Billson and Lardner appeal. Reversed.

Wm. W. Billson and Cutting & Lardner, for appellants.

Wilson & Wray and J. L. Washburn, for respondents.

BUCK, J.

Upon the merits this case is controlled by that of Wolf v. McKinley (Minn.) 68 N. W. 3. Upon the question of practice it appears that the trial court made its findings of fact and the order thereon on the 6th day of February, 1896, and filed the same February 7, 1896. Subsequently, pursuant to an agreement made between the respective attorneys, amended findings and an order thereon were made by the trial court, and substituted for the original findings, the order bearing date February 21, 1896, and filed February 27, 1896. There was some controversy as to the extent and materiality of the additional findings, but, so long as they stood as the completed findings and final order of the court upon the merits, they must be deemed as the only ones legally in force. The last ones had attached an order for 20 days' stay. The appeal, therefore, could be taken from the order dated February 21, 1896, within 30 days after written notice of the same. As the order made herein by the trial court is in conflict with the decision of this court made in the case of Wolf v. McKinley, it is hereby reversed, and the case remanded to the district court of St. Louis county, and said court directed to amend its conclusions of law, and cause an order to be entered therein awarding to the defendant William P. Lardner, as assignee of William McKinley, insolvent, the funds in controversy.

1 Rehearing denied.