Telander v. Sunlin
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota
At Law. On motion for a new trial. This action is brought to recover damages for personal injuries. It was tried before a court and jury at the September term of the court, at Minneapolis, for 1890. The plain ¡iff bad a verdict for $1,000, and a motion for a new trial was made by the defendants in due time, and heard before Judge Nelson and myself on the 10th day of November, 1890. The leading facts developed at the trial are as follows: The defendants are boiler-makers,…
Read the full summary
At Law. On motion for a new trial. This action is brought to recover damages for personal injuries. It was tried before a court and jury at the September term of the court, at Minneapolis, for 1890. The plain ¡iff bad a verdict for $1,000, and a motion for a new trial was made by the defendants in due time, and heard before Judge Nelson and myself on the 10th day of November, 1890. The leading facts developed at the trial are as follows: The defendants are boiler-makers, doing business in Minneapolis, and were at the time of the injury engaged in putting an intake pipe in position over a…
1Opinion of the Court
Thomas, J.,
(after stating the facts as above.) At the close of the evidence defendants’ counsel requested the court to direct a verdict for the defendants. The court overruled the motion, and the defendants took-an exception. Upon the argument of the motion for direction at the trial, a number of points were made by counsel for the defendants. Without abandoning those made at the trial, only two propositions were argued and presented on this motion: First, that Peterson, the boilermaker in charge of the work, had no express or implied authority to furnish or provide rope and tackle or other…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Railroad Co. v. StoutSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Randall v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Washington & Georgetown Railroad v. McDadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Kane v. Northern Central Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Anderson v. BennettOregon Supreme Court · 1888
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Thomas v. Ann Arbor RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
- Purcell Mill & Elevator Co. v. KirklandCourt Of Appeals Of Indian Territory · 1898
- Robinson v. Taku Fishing Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1903
- Boland v. Great Northern Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1913