Legal Opinion

Bowen v. City of St. Paul

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided May 5, 1922No. 22,784PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, C. J.

The facts in the case are not in material dispute. Plaintiff was a passenger on a street car on one of the car lines of St. Paul intending to transfer to another line at “Seven Corners,” a junction or intersection of several diverging streets in that part of the city. She alighted when the car stopped at the usual point and with other passengers with like intentions of transfer passed around the rear of the car and thence directly to the sidewalk a few feet distant. The place where the car so stopped was 40 or 50 feet from the street intersection, but passengers were customarily discharged at…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Bolstad v. Armour & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
  2. Maloy v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
  3. McKenzie v. City of NorthfieldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
  4. Thoorsell v. City of VirginiaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
  5. Estabrook v. City of DuluthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Lamb v. South Unit Jehovah's WitnessesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
  2. Williams v. John A. Stees Co. Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
  3. Campion v. City of RochesterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1938
  4. Dougherty v. GarrickSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
  5. McGandy v. City of MarshallSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929

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