Legal Opinion

Manteuffel v. Theo. Hamm Brewing Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 12, 1952No. 35,780PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Knutson, Justice.

Appeal from a judgment entered pursuant to a jury verdict in favor of plaintiff.

Plaintiff, who was employed by William Baumeister Construction Company as a painter, was assigned to work at defendant’s plant about October 15, 1949, and continued to work there until the date of the injury giving rise to this cause of action, which was January 5, 1950. While working in defendant’s plant, he, as well as other painters, was under the direct supervision of Charles A. Philbrook, an employe of defendant. In the absence of Philbrook, Ed Salenski *142took over the job of supervising.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Gleason v. GearySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
  2. Hanrahan v. Safway Steel Scaffold Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1951
  3. Hagsten v. SimbergSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
  4. Rue v. WendlandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1948
  5. Orth v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1891

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Frey v. Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
  2. Hartwig v. Loyal Order of Moose, Brainerd Lodge No. 1246Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1958
  3. Clark v. RENTAL EQUIPMENT COMPANY, INC.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
  4. Miller v. MacAlester CollegeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1962
  5. Monson v. ArcandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1953

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

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

Powered by the Exa API