Legal Opinion

Mozes v. Borlaug

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 26, 1934No. 29,703PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOLT, Justice.

There was a verdict for plaintiff. On defendant’s motion in the alternative for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial, judgment was ordered for defendant, and plaintiff appeals from the order.

About 10 p. m. of October 12, 1931, plaintiff, driving his Chevrolet car south on Thirty-sixth avenue south over Thirty-seventh street, Minneapolis, collided with a Ford car driven east on Thirty-seventh by defendant. Plaintiff sues to recover for the damage his Chevrolet car sustained in the collision. The only question presented by the appeal is: Does the evidence as a…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Dehaan v. WolffSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
  2. Rosenau v. PetersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
  3. Reddy v. Rex Oil Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1930

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Duffey v. CurtisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
  2. Haeg v. Sprague, Warner Co. Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1938
  3. Spensley v. Oliver Iron Mining Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
  4. Ballweber v. KleistSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1956
  5. Nye v. BachSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1936

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API