Hovorka v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Scott county, to-recover the value of two colts which were killed by a passing train on defendant’s railway. The complaint alleged that the defendant had neglected and failed to build and maintain a fence along its right of way through the quarter-section where the colts had been pastured,. and were killed.
Read the full summary
Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Scott county, to-recover the value of two colts which were killed by a passing train on defendant’s railway. The complaint alleged that the defendant had neglected and failed to build and maintain a fence along its right of way through the quarter-section where the colts had been pastured,. and were killed. On the trial, before Macdonald, J., and a jury, it appeared that, at the place where the colts had been pastured and were killed, there was a good and sufficient fence which had been built and maintained by the adjoining land-owner,…
1Opinion of the Court
Gilfillan, O. J.
The evidence shows, without dispute, that the fence between the field where plaintiff’s colts were pasturing and the defendant’s right of way was sufficient and in good condition, including the bars. Where or how the colts got upon the right of way does *222not appear. It does not appear to have been through any defect in. the fence. The fence was built and maintained by Shinick, the owner of the field. Upon the facts, the only proposition on which plaintiff can recover is that, although the colts did not get upon the track through any defect in the fence, the defendant is liable…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Craig v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
- Strand v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1951
- Hovorka v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
- Schaff v. TinkleSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
- Weaver v. Chicago & N. W. Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1910