Legal Opinion

Callahan v. City of Duluth

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided May 22, 1936No. 30,829PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Hilton, Justice.

Appeal from an order of the district court denying defendant’s alternative motion for judgment notAvithstanding the A'erdict or for a new trial.

March 10, 1935, plaintiff, about 69 years of age, slipped and fell Avliile crossing Lake aAmnue at a busy intersection in the business district of the city of Duluth. As a result of the fall she suffered severe injuries. This action is to recover damages from the city therefor.

A municipal corporation must keep its streets in a reasonably safe condition for public use and may be held liable for damages resulting from its failure to so…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Henkes v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
  2. Hillstrom v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
  3. Johnson v. HeglandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
  4. McClain v. City of DuluthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
  5. Barrett v. City of VirginiaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Kugling v. WilliamsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
  2. Bondanza v. MatteucciNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Wilcox v. SchlonerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1946
  4. Dempsey v. MeighenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1958
  5. Mathieson v. City of DuluthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1937

3 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