Legal Opinion

Guyer v. Smullen

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 27, 1924No. 24,003PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.

This is an appeal by plaintiff from an order denying him a new trial after a verdict for defendant Smullen in an action for damages for assault and battery. Defendants Peterson and Perkins did not appear by answer or otherwise and are not parties to this appeal.

The action grew out of the celebration at Waterville, in Le Sueur county, of the premature and spurious “armistice” of November 7, 1918. There have been three trials, the first two resulting in disagreements.

Plaintiff was the owner and in active charge of one of the several saloons in Waterville. Another went by the somewhat ironical…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Massett v. KeffSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1906
  2. Morris v. McClellanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1910
  3. Johanson v. Pioneer Fuel Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
  4. State v. ScottSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
  5. Drysdale v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1889

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Lange v. National Biscuit CompanySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1973
  2. Radermacher v. Sullivan (In Re Sullivan)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota · 1991
  3. State v. WinkelsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1939
  4. Sander v. DiesethSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
  5. Brown v. OestmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1961

2 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