Holly v. Bennett
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendants fiom an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Lochren, J., presiding, refusing a new trial after verdict of $500 for plaintiff, who brought the action to recover for personal injury to his child, a boy of six years.
1Opinion of the CourtVanderburgh, J.
The complaint sets forth a cause of action against defendants for their alleged negligence in erecting a pile of lumber in the public street so carelessly and insecurely that a largo stick of timber fell off upon the plaintiff’s infant son, who was lawfully in the street, causing the damage and injury complained of. The complaint is sufficient, as against a motion to exclude evidence under it at the trial. 'It sufficiently appears thereby that defendants were the proprietors of the lumber-yard, and were responsible for the manner in which the lumber was piled.
*387It was entirely proper to show by…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kennard v. BurtonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1845
3Cited by5 opinions
- Gimmestad v. Rose Brothers Co. Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
- Meagher v. HirtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1951
- Kelsey v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1962
- Scott v. WingenbergOhio Court of Appeals · 1916
- Scott v. WingenbergHamilton County Court · 1916