Gomulak v. C. A. Smith Lumber Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Holt, J., denying a motion for a new trial, after a trial and verdict in favor of defendant.
1Opinion of the Court
START, O. J.
This is a personal injury action in which the trial court, when the plaintiff rested his case, directed a verdict for the defendant on its motion, and the plaintiff appealed from an order denying his motion for a new trial.
The sole question for our decision, presented by the record, is whether the plaintiff’s evidence was sufficient to take the case to the jury on the question of the alleged negligence of the defendant.
The evidence is practically conclusive that on September 30, 1904, the defendant was operating a large sawmill in the city of Minneapolis; that the plaintiff was…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Floyd v. Ring Const. CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1948
- Sanitary Farm Dairies, Inc. v. GammelCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1952
- Pike Rapids Power Co. v. Minneapolis, St. P. & S. S. M. R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1938
- Kermit H. Severson, D/B/A Cardel Company v. Marcus FleckCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1958
- Alma v. Steele, Individually and as of the Estate of Charles F. Steele, Deceased v. Lelia M. McCargoCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1958
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.