Bark v. Dixson
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the municipal court of Minneapolis to recover $500 damages. The substance of the pleadings is given in the first paragraph of the opinion. The case was tried before O. L. Smith, J., and a jury which returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff for $300. From an order denying their motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or- for a new trial, defendants appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtBunn, J.
Defendants are the proprietors of the Majestic hotel, in Minneapolis. Plaintiff, on November 1, 1909, and for some time prior thereto, was employed as a chambermaid in the hotel. She received her board as a part of her compensation. This action was brought to recover damages for an illness suffered by plaintiff, which she claimed was caused by tainted meat furnished her as food by defendants. The complaint alleges in strong terms the decayed and poisonous condition of the meat eaten by plaintiff, and is evidently drawn to fit both the theory of implied warranty and the theory of negligence.…
2Cited by16 opinions
- Friend v. Childs Dining Hall Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918
- Davis v. Van Camp Packing Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1920
- Race v. . KrumNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
- Ellis v. LindmarkSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
- Pelletier v. DupontSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1925
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.