Legal Opinion · Dissent

White v. Cochrane

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 16, 1933No. 29,452Published

1DissentWilson, Chief Justice

In my judgment it is not necessary for plaintiff to rest upon the rule of res ipsa loquitur. I do not agree, however, that plaintiff, riding in the back seat in the dark knew all the movements, delinquencies, and activities of the driver, nor do I think her testimony acquits the driver of negligence. The facts and circumstances disclosed by this record are sufficient to justify the jury in finding negligence. The fact should not be overlooked that defendant did not take the stand. He offered no evidence.

In my judgment, the facts, permissible inferences, speed, and all the circumstances were…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Rye v. KingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API