Duryea v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
Loring, Justice.
In the trial court the plaintiff had judgment against the defendant railway company, Avhich, having moved for a directed verdict, now contends that it is entitled to judgment notwithstanding the verdict against it.
The plaintiff at the time he was injured was a brakeman with over 30 years’ experience, much of which had been in defendant’s employ. He was injured while engaged in a switching operation in the town of Windom in this state. The refrigerator car upon which he was riding when injured had been moved from one track to another and Avas at the time moving sloAvly by…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Anderson v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1933
- Stemper v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Collins v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1930
3Cited by2 opinions
- Ross v. Duluth, Missabe & Iron Range Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1938
- Stidham v. Southern Railway CompanySupreme Court of Alabama · 1954