Legal Opinion

Milloch v. Getty

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 26, 1974No. 44292PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Todd, Justice.

Plaintiffs Rudolph and Violet Milloch appeal from an order denying their motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, or, in the alternative, for a new trial. In a special verdict, the jury found that plaintiff Rudolph Milloch had assumed the risk of the injuries he sustained when he fell on defendant William J. Getty’s property. The trial court ordered judgment for defendants. We reverse.

Defendant Getty was the owner of the real property where the accident occurred, the Robo Car Wash and Mobile Station in Brainerd, Minnesota. He was also a dealer for defendant Mobil Oil…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Springrose v. WillmoreSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1971
  2. Schrader v. KrieselSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
  3. Olson v. HansenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
  4. Coenen v. Buckman Building CorporationSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1967
  5. Meulners v. HawkesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
  2. Reikow v. BITUMINOUS CONST. COMPANY, INC.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
  3. Konovsky v. Kraus-Anderson, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1976

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

Powered by the Exa API