Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Johnson v. Sunshine Creamery Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 2, 1937No. 31,343PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Concurrence

I concur in the result, but I do not agree that it was error to strike out the evidence relating to the cause of the collision between the Sunshine truck and that driven by Sweet. In my opinion, such collision was the remote as distinguished from the proximate cause of the later collision. It did not follow in unbroken sequence without an intervening efficient cause from the original collision. Doubtless, had the second collision occurred so soon after the first that there was no opportunity to comply with the statute or with the dictates of ordinary care as to warning, the sequence would…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Christianson v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
  2. Goar v. Village of StephenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
  3. La Londe v. PeakeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1901
  4. Hamilton v. VareSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Johnson v. Sunshine Creamery Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API