Jacobs v. Hoover
Supreme Court of Minnesota
APPEAL PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OP RICE COUNTY. Points and authorities of Counsel for Appellants. The Court was wrong in overruling the offer of the Defendants, made on the trial, to prove, in mitigation of damages, that the premises described in the complaint were obtained from the Defendant Neil, by the Plaintiff Jacobs, by fraud and false representations.
Read the full summary
APPEAL PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OP RICE COUNTY. Points and authorities of Counsel for Appellants. The Court was wrong in overruling the offer of the Defendants, made on the trial, to prove, in mitigation of damages, that the premises described in the complaint were obtained from the Defendant Neil, by the Plaintiff Jacobs, by fraud and false representations. The action being one in which the jury are allowed an almost unlimited discretion in the finding of vindictive damages, we submit that no evidence could tend more directly, palpably or properly to prevent or control the exercise of that…
1Opinion of the Court
*207 By the Court
Emmett, C. J.
This is an action brought by husband and wife to recover damages for alleged injuries to the person of the latter.
The complaint charges that the Defendants on, &e., assaulted', and beat, wounded, and terrified the Plaintiff, Lavina Jacobs— forcibly and unlawfulty turned her out of her house, fastened her out, and hindered and prevented her thereafter from reentering or returning thereto; whereby she suffered great injury, pain, etc., in body and mind, and was damaged in the sum of fifteen hundred dollars.
The Defendants answer separately, denying each and every…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Eastman v. GurreyUtah Supreme Court · 1897
- Goldsmith's Admr. v. JoySupreme Court of Vermont · 1889
- McGlone v. HaugerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1914
- State v. FellowsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Wasser v. Western Land Securities Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.