Court Opinion

ID: 7975060
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-09 00:58:54.883384+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:34:53.078106
License: Public Domain

Per Curiam.
This record raises no questions which require extended consideration by this court. The respondent was injured while in the employ of the defendant, working in and about a mangle. In an action for damages she recovered a verdict for $1,500, and the appeal is from an order denying the defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, or for a new trial. The record contains no prejudicial error.
The case is affirmed upon the authority of Cody v. Longyear, 103 Minn. 116, 114 N. W. 735; Dizonno v. Great Northern Ry. Co. 103 Minn. 120, 123, 114 N. W. 736; Lohman v. Swift & Co., 105 Minn. 148, 117 N. W. 418; Doerr v. Daily News Pub. Co., 97 Minn. 248, 106 N. W. 1044.
Order affirmed.