Opinion
No. 27,075.
January 11, 1929.
When new trial will not be granted.
Where several independent findings of fact are made by the trial court, any one of which is decisive of the case and sufficient to sustain the conclusions of law and decision, the fact that one of such findings may not be sustained by the evidence will not affect the result or require a new trial.
Action in the district court for St. Louis county for a divorce. At the opening of the trial plaintiff dismissed her cause of action, and the case went to trial on defendant's cross-bill and plaintiff's answer thereto. The court made findings of fact and as conclusions of law directed the entry of judgment dismissing plaintiff's complaint and defendant's cross-bill and counterclaim. From an order, Hughes, J. denying his motion for a new trial, defendant appealed. Affirmed.
Charles W. Scrutchin and Benjamin M. Goldberg, for appellant.
Naughtin Henley, for respondent.
Appeal by defendant from an order denying his motion for a new trial.
At the opening of the trial plaintiff dismissed her cause of action. The case went to trial on defendant's cross-bill and plaintiff's answer thereto. A jury was waived. Several separate findings of fact, each of which, if sustained by the evidence, is decisive of the case, were made by the trial court. After hearing the oral arguments and examining the assignments of error, briefs and record, the evidence is found sufficient to sustain at least two decisive findings of fact which cannot here be disturbed on the ground of insufficiency of evidence. No errors justifying a reversal or new trial are shown.
Complaint is made of a finding that a judgment in a prior action between the parties, which was not entered until at the close of the trial of this action, was found to be a bar to the cause of action set forth by defendant in his cross-bill. The correctness of that finding need not be determined. Where independent findings of fact, decisive of the case, are sustained and must stand, it is immaterial whether or not some other finding is sustained by the evidence. Snell v. Snell, 54 Minn. 285, 55 N.W. 1131; Newport v. Smith, 61 Minn. 277, 63 N.W. 734; Fidelity Casualty Co. v. Crays, 76 Minn. 450, 79 N.W. 531.
Order affirmed.