PER CURIAM.
After the disposition of this case on the former appeal (104 Minn. 289, 116 N. W. 583) the plaintiff made a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. The motion was denied, and under the established rule (Bunker v. United Order of Foresters, 97 Minn. 361, 107 N. W. 392, and cases therein cited) we cannot, ón this record, say that the court abused its discretion. Affirmed.