Legal Opinion
Shearer v. Puent
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided March 26, 1926No. 25,106PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDibejx, J.
Action to recover for personal injuries. There was a verdict for the plaintiff. He appeals, from the order denying his motion for new trial upon the ground of inadequacy of damages.
Though the damages awarded are inadequate the plaintiff cannot prevail upon his appeal if the record presents no right of recovery; that is, if his own negligence contributed to the injury or if the defendants were not negligent. Young v. G. N. Ry. Co. 80 Minn. 128, 83 N. W. 32; Maki v. St. Luke’s Hospital Assn. 122 Minn. 444, 142 N. W. 705. And it is the claim of the defendants that the plaintiff was negligent,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Stenshoel v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
- Alden v. Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
- Maki v. St. Luke's Hospital Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- Nye v. DibleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
- Ott v. Tri-State Telephone & Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Fulton v. Chouteau County Farmers' Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1934
- Flaugh v. Egan Chevrolet, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1938
- Olson v. ChristiansenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
- Seydel v. ReuberSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1959
- Hurr v. JohnstonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.