Legal Opinion

Mykleby v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 26, 1888PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Eamsey county, Wilkin, J., presiding, refusing a new trial.

1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.

Aside from much irrelevant matter, the allegations of the complaint are that the plaintiff was'a passenger, and was received as such by defendant, on one of its coaches, to be by it conveyed from Eau Claire to Black River Falls; that, having left the train for a temporary purpose at an intermediate point, he proceeded again to enter one of the passenger coaches, when “the defendant, by its agent and seiwants then and there in charge of the train, and acting within the scope of their employment, prevented the plaintiff, after he had boarded one of said cars, and gained the steps thereof, from…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Brown v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1882
  2. Sanford v. . Eighth Avenue Railroad CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1861
  3. Whittaker v. CollinsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Wild v. RarigSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
  2. Beaulieu v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
  3. Farmer v. CrosbySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
  4. Lindh v. Great Northern Railway CompanySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
  5. Saltou v. Dependable Ins. Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986

2 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