Frasch v. City of New Ulm
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Brown county to recover $6,000. From an order, Olsen, J., sustaining defendant’s demurrer to the complaint, plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.
The city of New Ulm owns and maintains a system of waterworks, from which its inhabitants are supplied with water for a fixed price. The city is sued for negligently furnishing plaintiff contaminated *42water, causing her severe illness and large expense. This appeal is from an order sustaining a demurrer to the complaint.
No question is made of the sufficiency of the complaint, except for the absence of an allegation that written notice of claim was served upon the city, within 30 days of the loss or injury, in accordance with the provision of section 1786, G. S. 1913. Plaintiff contends that…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- State v. EvansSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Henry v. City of LincolnNebraska Supreme Court · 1913
- Keever v. City of MankatoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
- Tonn v. City of HelenaMontana Supreme Court · 1910
- Wiltse v. City of Red WingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Thomann v. City of RochesterNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
- Gruener v. City of Cedar FallsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1971
- Kozisek v. BrighamSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Szroka v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
- Hirth v. Village of Long PrairieSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1966
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.