Legal Opinion

Brown v. Burrow

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided May 6, 1927No. Nos. 25,972, 25,973PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.

Action for damages, verdicts for defendant, and a separate appeal in each case from the order denying a new trial.

The plaintiff Ida Brown claimed that, as she was walking across Sixth street going north on the westerly side of Sibley street in St. Paul, defendant carelessly drove his automobile upon her and fractured a bone in her foot. The plaintiff Samuel Brown, Ida’s husband, sued to recover the loss he sustained because of his wife’s injuries. The actions were tried together. We need make no further reference to the husband’s action, for its disposition must follow the wife’s. Since a new…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Eichhorn v. LundinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
  2. Jovaag v. O'DonnellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1933
  3. Rian v. HegnauerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
  4. Romann v. BenderSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
  5. Maher v. RoisnerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1953

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API