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.…
1ConcurrenceBirdzell, J.
(specially concurring). In its final analysis the case of the respondent rests upon the validity of the proposition asserted in one sentence in respondent’s brief. It is said:
“. . . If he [Schantz] should have known of the danger, then he took his chances in doing the work in the manner ordered, and cannot recover.”
If the answer to the first interrogatory be construed as placing the servant in the same situation he would have occupied had he actually known of the danger, would the knowledge of the dangers attending his act- in attempting to board the moving train be sufficient to preclude…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hennessy v. GinsbergNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1920
- Renfeldt v. Brush-McWilliams Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1920