Legal Opinion

Fostrom v. Grossman

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 16, 1925No. Nos. 24,333, 24,334PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Lees, 0.

In these cases, as in Langan v. Nathanson, and Adams v. Nathanson, supra, page 433, the principal question is whether an employer is liable for the consequences of the negligence of his employe in driving the employer’s car. The jury found liability and the owners of the car have appealed from an order denying their motion in the alternative for judgment or a new trial.

The accident happened on April 17, 1922. The driver was a man named Richmond. He sold cars for appellants on a commission basis. In soliciting business, he sometimes took a car to demonstrate its efficiency to the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Provo v. ConradSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
  2. Robertson v. SpitlerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
  3. Stoneman v. Washburn-Crosby Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
  4. Milton v. Biesanz Stone Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1906

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Frankle v. TwedtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1951
  2. Sam Horne Motor and Implement Company v. GreggCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1955
  3. Lund v. OlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
  4. National Battery Co. v. LevyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1942
  5. Malmquist v. Hellenic Community of Minneapolis, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1925

7 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