Case Name: MAUDE H. STROMME v. GUSTAV RIECK and Another
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Minnesota
Decision Date: 1910-04-22
Citations: 110 Minn. 472
Docket Number: Nos. 16,704—(49)
Parties: MAUDE H. STROMME v. GUSTAV RIECK and Another.
Judges: 
Reporter: Minnesota Reports
Volume: 110
Pages: 472–473

Head Matter:
MAUDE H. STROMME v. GUSTAV RIECK and Another.
April 22, 1910.
Nos. 16,704—(49).
Order not Appealable.
An order, made before judgment, allowing an amended or supplemental pleading, is not appealable.
Action in the district court for Hennepin county for specific performance of a written agreement for the exchange of land and to recover $1,000 damages. After the decision of the former appeal (see 107 Minn. 177, 119 N. W. 948) plaintiff moved the trial court for leave to file a supplemental complaint. From an order, Brooks, J., granting the motion, defendant Gustav Rieck appealed.
Dismissed.
A. C. Middelstadt, for appellant.
C. D. Austin, for respondent.
Reported in 125 N. W. 1021.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
This is an appeal from an order, made before judgment, granting-leave to file and serve a proposed supplemental complaint. Is such an order appealable? No. An order, made after judgment, allowing an amended or supplemental pleading, is appealable, because it. directly affects the judgment, and is a final order involving the merits, of the action, or some part thereof. North v. Webster, 36 Minn. 99, 30 N. W. 429; Voak v. National Investment Co., 51 Minn. 450, 53 N. W. 708.
If such an order is made before judgment, it may be reviewed on appeal from the judgment, when entered, or on an appeal from an order denying a motion for a new trial, if the order allowing the amended or supplemental pleading was made on the trial as a part thereof, but no appeal lies from such order made before judgment. City of Winona v. Minn. R. C. Co., 25 Minn. 328; Manwaring v. O'Brien, 75 Minn. 542, 78 N. W. 1; Hanley v. Board of Commrs.. of Cass County, 87 Minn. 209, 91 N. W. 756.
Appeal dismissed.