Case Name: GAD M. DWELLE v. PATRICK H. RAHILLY
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Minnesota
Decision Date: 1900-04-27
Citations: 79 Minn. 314
Docket Number: Nos. 12,123-(24)
Parties: GAD M. DWELLE v. PATRICK H. RAHILLY.
Judges: 
Reporter: Minnesota Reports
Volume: 79
Pages: 314–315

Head Matter:
GAD M. DWELLE v. PATRICK H. RAHILLY.
April 27, 1900.
Nos. 12,123—(24).
Appeal — Evidence of Payment of Mote.
Action in the district court for Wabasha county by plaintiff, as receiver of Merchants Bank of Lake City, to recover a balance of $236, and interest, on a promissory note made by defendant to the order of the bank. The case was tried before Snow, J., and a jury, which rendered a verdict in favor of plaintiff for $304.05. From an order denying a motion for a new trial, defendant appealed.
Affirmed.
Henry W. Morgcm, for appellant.
Allen J. Greer and Wesley Kinney, for respondent.

Opinion:
PER GURIAM.
Action to recover a balance of $236, alleged to be due on a promissory note. Defense that $200 of this amount had been paid. The trial resulted in a verdict by the jury for the full, amount. From an order denying a motion for a new trial, defendant appeals.
It is necessary to mention one only of the errors assigned, viz., is the evidence insufficient to support the verdict, and did the court, for that reason, err in refusing to grant a new trial? Defendant insists that the direct statement as to the payment of the $200 was not met by any positive evidence on part of the plaintiff. The court properly submitted the question to the jury. The evidence' is not clearly and palpably against the verdict, and therefore, within the rule long established by the decisions of this state, the order must be affirmed.
Order affirmed.