Case ID: minn_108/html/0083-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

NIKANNIS COMPANY and Another v. CITY OF DULUTH.
    
    May 21, 1909.
    Nos. 16,139—(115).
    Orders Not Appealable.
    Neither an order for judgment nor an order denying a motion to amend the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law is appealable.
    An assessment against the lots of appellants having been levied by the board of public works of Duluth for the repaving and improving of a certain street, an appeal from the assessment was taken to the district court for St. Louis county. The matter was heard before Cant, J., who made findings and ordered judgment confirming the assessment. Judgment was entered pursuant to the order. From an order refusing to grant their motion to amend the findings of fact and conclusions of law, and from the order for judgment, the lot owners appealed.
    Dismissed.
    
      A. E. McManus, for appellants.
    
      Coryate 8. Wilson and E. M. Morgan, for respondent.
    
      
       Reported in 121 N. W. 212.
    
   Per Curiam.

Appeal from an order for judgment, and also from an order refusing to grant a motion to amend the findings of fact and conclusions of law. An order for judgment is not appealable. Ryan v. Kranz, 25 Minn. 362; Croft v. Miller, 26 Minn. 317, 4 N. W. 45; St. Anthony Falls Bank v. Graham, 67 Minn. 318, 69 N. W. 1077.

An order denying a motion to amend the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law is not appealable. Lamprey v. St. Paul & Chicago Ry. Co., 86 Minn. 509, 515, 91 N. W. 29, and cases cited.

Appeal dismissed.