Legal Opinion

Schoch v. Winona & St. Peter Railroad

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 13, 1893No. 8469PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal by defendant, the Winona and St. Peter Bailroad Company, from a judgment of the District Court of Brown County, B. F. Webber, J., entered July 14, 1893, against it for $87.19. The plaintiff, Jacob L. Schoch, commenced this action February '21, 1893, in a Justice’s Court at New Ulm to recover $44 for his services as surgeon and physician in treating one Joe Woratchke, a servant of defendant, injured while in its service. He had judgment for $44 and costs.

Read the full summary

Appeal by defendant, the Winona and St. Peter Bailroad Company, from a judgment of the District Court of Brown County, B. F. Webber, J., entered July 14, 1893, against it for $87.19. The plaintiff, Jacob L. Schoch, commenced this action February '21, 1893, in a Justice’s Court at New Ulm to recover $44 for his services as surgeon and physician in treating one Joe Woratchke, a servant of defendant, injured while in its service. He had judgment for $44 and costs. Defendant appealed to the District Court on questions of both law and fact. It then moved the Court on notice and affidavits to…

1Opinion of the CourtVanderburgh, J.

This action was brought and tried in Justice’s Court, in the county of Brown. The defendant appealed from the judgment to the District Court in that county, upon questions of both law and fact. It is admitted that the defendant’s railway runs through Brown county, and it has a station and a freight and ticket agent at New Ulm, in that county.

The case was properly tried in that county, and the District Court regularly acquired jurisdiction thereof upon the appeal. Thereupon, the defendant demanded that the place of trial be changed from the county of Brown to the county of Winona, on the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Wilson v. RichardsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1881
  2. Carpenter v. ComfortSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1876
  3. Hinds v. BackusSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Lundblad v. EricksonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1930
  2. In Re Estate of FirleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1934
  3. Taylor v. Grand Lodge A. O. U. W.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
  4. Thomas v. Hector Construction Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
  5. Pollock v. Detroit United RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1912

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