Kommerstad v. Great Northern Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Lyon county to recover $30,000 for personal injury. The facts are stated in the opinion. The defendant demurred to the complaint for the reason that on its face it did: not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The demurrer was overruled, Olsen, J. From the order overruling the demurrer, defendant appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtHallam, J.
This is an appeal from an order overruling a demurrer to plaintiff’s complaint. Plaintiff alleges that he was in the employ of the-defendant as a section man cutting grass upon defendant’s right of way; that defendant failed to fence its track as required by law; that by reason thereof a horse strayed upon the track near where plaintiff was employed; that while on the track it was struck by a train of defendant and thrown against plaintiff. It is further alleged! “that said defendant negligently, recklessly, and carelessly ran said train at a high and dangerous rate of speed; * * * that said!…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Carroll v. Minnesota Valley RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1869
- Ellington v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1905
- Fleming v. St. Paul & Duluth RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1880
- Wallin v. Eastern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1901
- Boyer v. Eastern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Geiger v. Simpson Methodist-Episcopal ChurchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
- Torgerson v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1923
- Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
- Wildwood Mink Ranch v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1963
- Garraghty v. HartsteinNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1913
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.