Legal Opinion

Hedicke v. Highland Springs Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 24, 1931No. 28,637PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.

The appeal is from the judgment. Plaintiff had a verdict; but, upon defendant’s motion in the alternative for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial, the court ordered judgment for defendant.

Defendant is engaged in the business of bottling and selling spring water in the city of St. Paul. Plaintiff had been in its employ some eight months previous to'March 22,1929, washing and filling bottles, loading on delivery trucks, and delivering to customers. The bottles used are one-gallon, two-gallon, and five-gallon bottles. After the bottles are washed, the one-gallon bottles are…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Koschman v. AshSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
  2. Dessecker v. Phœnix Mills Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
  3. Anderson v. Fred Johnson Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1911
  4. Mozey v. EricksonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
  5. Kromer v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1918

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Jacob v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  2. Ricketts v. Kansas City Stock Yards Co. of MaineSupreme Court of Missouri · 1972
  3. Maher v. WagnerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1934
  4. Newbern v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1934
  5. Rule v. GiuglioMichigan Supreme Court · 1942

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API