Abbett v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Lochren, J., presiding, refusing a new trial, after verdict for defendant under the direction of the court.,
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
This was an action for damages for injuries to plaintiff’s horse and wagon, alleged to have been caused by the negligence of defendant. At' the time of the accident the horse and wagon were in charge of one Barnum, the servant of plaintiff. When the evidence closed, the court directed a verdict for defendant, on the ground that it appeared that Barnum was guilty of negligence which contributed to the injury. The correctness of this direction is the only question presented by the case. 1
Negligence is ordinarily a question for the jury. It is always so where the evidence on material points is…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Railroad Company v. HoustonSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Zimmerman v. Hannibal & St. Joseph RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1880
- Allyn v. Boston & Albany RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- St. Louis & South-Eastern Railway Co. v. MathiasIndiana Supreme Court · 1874
- Brown v. Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1875
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Union Pac. Ry. Co. v. JarviCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1892
- Gratiot v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railway Co. v. HedgesIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
- Hanrahan v. Safway Steel Scaffold Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1951
- Yates v. GambleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1936
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.