Lee v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Freeborn county, Farmer, J., presiding, denying its motion to require the complaint to be made more definite and certain. cited Hargreaves v. Deacon, 25 Mich. 1; Kohn v. Lovett, 44 Ga. 251; Cahill v. Layton, 57 Wis. 600; Fraker v. St. Paul, M. & M. By. Co., 30 Minn. 103; Madden v. Minn, é St. L. By. Co., Id. 453.
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
This appeal is from an order denying a motion to make the complaint more definite and certain. The action was for damages caused by the alleged negligence of defendant in leaving exposed and unguarded in its yard at Albert Lea a receptacle for boiling water, into which, on the 24th day of November, 1883, the plaintiff fell, while he “was lawfully upon said premises by the invitation of the defendant, having been invited there by said defendant to obtain employment.” This the defendant asked to have made more definite and certain by stating how said invitation was extended to the plaintiff,…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Bowers v. SchulerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Ft. Smith W. R. Co. v. KetisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- Johnson v. Great Northern Railway Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1903
- Todd v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Thompson v. LillegaardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.