Dunn v. Great Northern Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Wright county to recover $8,500 for injuries received while in defendant’s employ. The answer alleged negligence on the part of plaintiff and that he knew and appreciated the risks of his employment. The case was tried before Eish, J., who at the close of the testimony denied defendant’s motion for a directed verdict, and a jury which returned a verdict for $1,100. From the judgment entered pursuant to the verdict, defendant appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtDibell, J.
Action for personal injuries. There was a verdict for the plaintiff. Defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict was denied and judgment entered for the plaintiff. The defendant appeals from the judgment.
1. There being no motion for a new trial, and only for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, the only question is whether there is competent evidence to support the verdict. Prigge v. Selz, Schwab & Co. 134 Minn. 345, 158 N. W. 975, and cases cited; Martin v. Minneapolis & St. L. R. Co. 138 Minn. 40, 163 N. W. 983, and cases cited; Hoggarth v. Minneapolis & St. L. R. Co. 138…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Prigge v. SelzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
- Hoggarth v. Minneapolis & St. Louis RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
- Hjelm v. City of St. CloudSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
- Martin v. Minneapolis & St. Louis RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917