Shea v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from an order of the municipal court of Minneapolis, Holt, J., denying a motion for a new trial, after a verdict in favor of plaintiff' for $267.87.
1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.
1. There is no merit in the first assignment of error, that the court erred when sustaining an objection to the introduction in evidence of defendant’s Exhibit No. 3, — a bill of lading. The purpose of this offer, as stated by counsel, was to show that the oranges in controversy were consigned to Spear & Co., and not to plaintiff. No foundation was laid for the introduction in evidence of the exhibit, and, even if there had been, the parties had already .stipulated that the consignment was to the plaintiff. Defendant was bound by the stipulation, and could not be allowed to contradict it, .as…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Shriver v. Sioux City & St. Paul RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1878
- Boehl v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- Lindsley v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Hull v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- D. M. Osborne & Co. v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
3Cited by10 opinions
- Rustad v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co. v. Home InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
- Fockens v. United States Express Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Beede v. Wisconsin Central Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
- International & Great Northern Railroad v. ParishCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1898
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.