Legal Opinion

Stuelpnagel v. Paper, Calmenson & Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided May 6, 1910No. Nos. 16,522—(48)PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Action in the district court for Ramsey county to recover $2,550 for personal injuries. The facts are stated in the opinion. The case was tried before Hallam, J., and a jury which returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff for $1,000. From the judgment entered pursuant to the verdict, defendant appealed.

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

This action was brought to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been received by plaintiff in consequence of the negligence of defendant. Plaintiff had a verdict, upon which judgment was rendered, after the denial of defendant’s motion for a new trial, and defendant appealed.

The facts, clearly summarized by the trial court in its memorandum attached to the order denying a new trial, are substantially as follows: Plaintiff was in the employ of the United States Bedding Company as a teamster. The evidence tends to show that on the day in question his foreman directed him to drive to…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Kelly v. TyraSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
  2. Mulcahy v. DieudonneSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
  3. Corrigan v. ElsingerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
  4. Buenemann v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
  5. Dean v. St. Paul Union Depot Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1889

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Hunter v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1930
  2. Thill v. FreiermuthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API