gal effect of such an order to prevent the entry of a judgment from which an appeal might be taken.
2. Same; Same; Not Even if Court Refuses to Order Judgment for Either Party.
Held, further, that the order is not rendered appealable by the fact that the district court had previously denied defendant's application for judgment on the findings of the jury.
(Opinion Filed October 20, 1890.)
APPEAL from district court, Stutsman county; Hon. Roderick Rose, Judge.
George K. Andrus, Edgar W. Camp and Messrs. Scott and Remington, for appellants, cited: Belt v. Davis, 1 Cal. 136; Hill v. Sherwood, 33 id. 478; U. S. v. Schooner Peggy, 1 Cranch 193; Powell on Appellate Proceedings, sec. 111; Lamphear v. Lamphry, 4 Mass. 108; Tappen v. Buren, 5 id. 195; Hayne on New Trial and Appeal, § 184.
Herman Winterer and Frank J. Young (J. B. and W. H. Sanborn of counsel) for respondent, filed no printed brief.
Wallin, J. After a trial had in this action the jury returned a general verdict, and, in addition thereto, returned answers to certain interrogations submitted to them by the trial court. Subsequently, the defendant, assuming that the findings of the jury were in his favor, moved for judgment upon such findings. The motion was denied. Thereafter the plaintiff, assuming that the findings of the jury entitled them to a judgment, moved the district court upon such findings for judgment in favor of the plaintiffs. The latter motion was likewise denied by the court, and, from the order denying the same, plaintiffs appeal to this court. The refusal of the district court to grant plaintiffs’ application for judgment upon the findings is assigned as error by the plaintiffs. No judgment has been entered in the action. In this court a preliminary motion is made by respondent to dismiss the appeal, upon the ground, among others, that an order refusing to enter judgment upon a verdict is not an appealable order. The motion raises a question going to the jurisdiction of the court to consider the merits. If the order is not appealable, this court has not acquired jurisdiction to pass upon any
