Boll v. Gruesxer
South Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from Circuit Court, Minnahaha County. Hon, John T. Medin, Judge. Action by William Boll, against Jake Gruesner and' S. M. Graceman, to recover damages resulting from collision of de-' fendants’ automobile with plaintiff’s automobile. From a judgment for plaintiff, and from an- order denying a new trial, defendants appeal.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Circuit Court, Minnahaha County. Hon, John T. Medin, Judge. Action by William Boll, against Jake Gruesner and' S. M. Graceman, to recover damages resulting from collision of de-' fendants’ automobile with plaintiff’s automobile. From a judgment for plaintiff, and from an- order denying a new trial, defendants appeal. (1) To point one of the opinion, Appellant cited: Schnabel v. Kafer, 39 'S. D. 70, 162 N. W. 935; Huddy on Automobiles, Secs. 409, ,410. Respondent cited: Ray v Brannau (Ala. 1916), 72 S. 16. (2) To point two, Appellants cited: Huddy on Automobiles, Sec. 411; and…
1Opinion of the CourtGates, J.
Action for damages caused by the collision of two automobiles. Plaintiff was. driving west on the north side of Twelfth street, and defendants were driving north on the ;east side of Summit avenue, in the city of Sioux Falls. There was a collision west and north of the center of the intersection of the two streets.
There was an irreconcilable conflict in the evidence as to *530nearly all of the facts. Plaintiff’s evidence tended to show that defendants’ car struck plaintiff’s. Defendants’ evidence tended to show that plaintiff’s ear did the striking. Plaintiff’s evidence tended to show that he…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Elgin Dairy Co. v. ShepherdIndiana Supreme Court · 1915
- Simmons v. PetersenMichigan Supreme Court · 1919
3Cited by1 opinion
- Imus v. HuberNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1955