Hamilton v. Vare
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the CourtOlsen, J.
The appeal is from a judgment in favor of the defendant city of St. Paul entered on an order for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The defendant Vare is not a party to the appeal. The trial court granted the motion of the city for judgment notAvithstanding the verdict on the ground that any negligence on the part of the city in the matter was not a proximate cause of any damage to plaintiff. We have for revieAv the one question Avhether the evidence was sufficient to shoAV causal connection between the alleged negligence of the city and the personal injury to plaintiff and damage to his…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Christianson v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
- Cole v. German Savings & Loan Soc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1903
- Healy v. HoySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911
- Barrett v. Mayor of SavannahCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1911
- City of Rock Falls v. WellsIllinois Supreme Court · 1897
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Geisen v. LuceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
- Anderson v. AndersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1933
- Smith v. CarlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
- Bartley v. FritzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1939
- Hack v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1937
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.