Schantz v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.
North Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from judgment of the District Court of Morton County, North Dakota, Honorable W. C. Crawford, Judge. “A general verdict and special findings should he reconciled, if possible, and no specific finding should overthrow the general verdict unless entirely inconsistent and irreconcilable thereto.” Drouillard v. Southern P. Co. (Cal.) 172 Pac. 405; Wyldes v. Patterson, 31 N. D. 382, 153 N. W. 631; Cowan v. Mpls.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of the District Court of Morton County, North Dakota, Honorable W. C. Crawford, Judge. “A general verdict and special findings should he reconciled, if possible, and no specific finding should overthrow the general verdict unless entirely inconsistent and irreconcilable thereto.” Drouillard v. Southern P. Co. (Cal.) 172 Pac. 405; Wyldes v. Patterson, 31 N. D. 382, 153 N. W. 631; Cowan v. Mpls. St. P. & S. S. M. R. Co. 172 N. W. 322. “A servant only assumes those risks of which he is aware and appreciates.” Umstad v. Colgate Elevator Co. 18 N. D. 309; Gila Valley C. & N.…
1Concurrence
Christianson, Ch. J.
(concurring specially). When this case was here on a former appeal, I was of the opinion that the trial court properly instructed the jury to return a verdict in favor of the defendant See Schantz v. Northern P. R. Co. 42 N. D. 377, 173 N. W. 558. Time has not altered the views which I then entertained and expressed. These views, however, were not shared by a majority of this court. They believed that under the evidence the question of negli*15gence and assumption of risk were for the jury. Hence, that was the decision of this court. And that decision, right or wrong, became…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Schantz v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1919
- Schmidt v. BeisekerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1909
- Hennessy v. GinsbergNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1920