Williams v. Great Northern Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Bamsey county, Otis, J., denying a motion for a new trial. Before parties to actions were permitted to testify in their own behalf evidence of complaints of pain or present suffering made to others was admitted on the ground of necessity.
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Bamsey county, Otis, J., denying a motion for a new trial. Before parties to actions were permitted to testify in their own behalf evidence of complaints of pain or present suffering made to others was admitted on the ground of necessity. The person who was suffering could not testify as to his feelings and symptoms, and to exclude such evidence would have in effect prevented a fair presentation of the case to the court. It was the best evidence that could be produced under the rule then in force. It was, therefore, made an exception…
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
The plaintiff brought this action to recover $50,-000 damages for personal injuries received on September 11, 1895, from a collision of two of defendant’s trains, on one of which he was at the time employed as United States mail agent. The defendant admitted its liability in some amount, but joined issue as to the *57amount of the damages which plaintiff was entitled to recover. This was the only issue in the case. The trial resulted in a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for $20,000. The record and assignments of error present hut two questions: First, whether the court erred in admitting in…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Roche v. . Brooklyn City Newtown R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Cooper v. St. Paul City Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Johnson v. Northern Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
- Hagenlocher v. . the C.I. B.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Jones v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. WoelfleCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1936
- Lee v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
- Berg v. UllevigSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
- Moratzky v. WirthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
- Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. v. JacksonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.