Legal Opinion

Fraker v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided April 24, 1884PublishedCited by 15 opinions

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Lochren, J., presiding, refusing a new trial after verdict of $1,000 for plaintiff.

1Opinion of the CourtVanderburgh, J.

For the purposes of this appeal it must be taken as admitted that the plaintiff, at the time of the injury complained of, had been for several months in the employ of the defendant as a brakeman in the yard of the company at Minneapolis. It was his duty, in connection with an engineer, foreman, and other employes, to assist in handling and moving freight cars for different purposes, including damaged or broken cars which were required to be transferred to repair tracks in the same yard. While thus engaged with them in the course of his employment, on the day in question, in removing a damaged…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Fuller v. . JewettNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
  2. Wright v. . New York Central Railroad CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
  3. Davis v. Detroit & Milwaukee Rail RoadMichigan Supreme Court · 1870
  4. Slater v. . JewettNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
  5. Holden v. Fitchburg RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Lindvall v. WoodsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
  2. Anderson v. BennettOregon Supreme Court · 1888
  3. Tierney v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
  4. Broderick v. St. Paul City Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
  5. Chesapeake & O. R. v. HennesseyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1899

10 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