Frank v. Anderson Bros.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
Matson, Justice.
Plaintiff appeals from an order sustaining a demurrer to his complaint in a common-law action for damages for disfigurement.
Pursuant to the demurrer we have these facts: On June 14, 1950, plaintiff, as a “dope dobber” (sic), was employed by defendant in smearing hot dope (a tarlike material) on a pipe to be used in the laying of a pipe line. Through defendant’s negligence, a bucket of the hot dope was upset and a part of the contents was spattered upon plaintiff’s face, head, neck, shoulders, and other parts of his body. He was hospitalized for five days, after which he was…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Breimhorst v. BeckmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1949
- Donnelly v. Minneapolis Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
- Hyett v. Northwestern Hospital for Women & ChildrenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
- Fehland v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
- Kummer v. Mutual Auto Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Knopp v. GuttermanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1960
- Karst v. FC Hayer Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- Dockendorf v. LakieSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1953
- Christensen v. State, Department of Conservation, Game & FishSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1970
- Graeber Bros., Inc. v. TaylorMississippi Supreme Court · 1959
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.