Legal Opinion
White v. Brainerd Service Motor Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided October 17, 1930No. 28,061PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.
Defendant appeals from the order denying its motion in the alternative for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a nevv trial.
Defendant, a corporation, owns, uses, and operates motor vehicles,, its place of business being at Brainerd, Minnesota. Robert Ander:. son was in its employ and was sent to Minneapolis in the afternoon of December 1, 1928, to get a LaSalle convertible coupé, owned by defendant, and drive it to Brainerd. He was also directed to go to a theater in Minneapolis for some tickets ordered by his employer. Anderson obtained the car, but instead of getting the tickets and…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Rolfe v. . HewittNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
- O'Leary v. FashMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
- Brookhouse v. Union Publishing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1905
- Johnson v. EvansSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
- McQueen v. People's Store Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1917
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Antonen v. SwansonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1951
- Morris v. Dame'sSupreme Court of Virginia · 1933
- Liggett & Myers Tobacco Co. v. De ParcqCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1933
- Meyer v. CulleyWyoming Supreme Court · 1952
- Kuharski v. Somers Motor Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1945
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.