Nicol v. City of St. Paul
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Bamsey county to recover $5,0.00 for personal’ injuries. The case was tried before Otis, J., who directed a verdict in favor of defendant. From an order denying a motion for a new trial, plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the Court
START, O. J.
This is a personal injury action. Notice of the plaintiff’s injury, and her claim for damages by reason thereof, were duly given and presented to the counsel of the defendant city, as required by the provisions of Laws 1897, c. 248. The trial court directed a verdict for the defendant, for the reason that notice of the injury had not been given to the mayor or clerk of the city as provided by its charter (Sp. Laws 1885, c. 7, § 19 [p. 74]). The plaintiff appealed from an order denying her motion for a new trial.
The only question raised by the record in this case which we find it…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Reining v. . City of Buffalo, Etc.New York Court of Appeals · 1886
- Curry v. . City of BuffaloNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Doyle v. City of DuluthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
- Bausher v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
- Kelly v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Ackeret v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
- Badger v. HoidaleCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1937
- Peterson v. City of Red WingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
- State ex rel. Fitz v. JensenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
- American Automobile Insurance v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1961
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.