Smith v. Wilson
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Eamsey county, to recover $495, which he alleged had been stolen from him while a guest in defendant’s hotel in St. Paul, and while he was asleep in his room, the door of which he had bolted, the bolt however proving insecure.
Read the full summary
Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Eamsey county, to recover $495, which he alleged had been stolen from him while a guest in defendant’s hotel in St. Paul, and while he was asleep in his room, the door of which he had bolted, the bolt however proving insecure. The answer put in issue the averments of the complaint, and alleged that plaintiff had complied with the statutory conditions of exemption from liability by providing a sufficient safe and keeping posted the statutory notice, and providing locks and bolts for all room doors, etc. At the trial before Wilkin, J., the…
1Opinion of the CourtDickinson, J.
The point that the verdict was not justified by the evidence presents the question whether it is apparent, upon the review of the case, that the testimony of the plaintiff as to the possession of the money alleged to have been taken from his person, and as to the fact of the robbery, was unworthy of belief by the jury. If it was credible, it clearly justified the verdict. Its most apparent infirmity was that in some important particulars it was different from the testimony of the same witness upon a former trial, as to the sources from which he received the money. The discrediting facts,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Wilkins v. . EarleNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
- Pinkerton v. WoodwardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
3Cited by5 opinions
- Rayburn v. Central Iowa Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1887
- Briggs v. ToddAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1899
- Loy v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1913
- Youngquist v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
- Corrigan v. San Marcos Hotel Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1950