Legal Opinion

Harrington v. Wagner

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided February 8, 1929No. Nos. 27,038, 27,039PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtWilson, C. J.

There are two actions. Defendant Wagner has appealed from an order in each case denying his alternative motion for judgment non obstante or a new trial.

These are automobile cases. Both plaintiffs were guests in the car of defendant Hill which was traveling east. Defendant Anderson was driving west. Defendant Wagner was driving his car, following Anderson.

Plaintiffs claim that Anderson and Wagner were driving too fast; that Anderson was negligently on his left side of the road, that his left rear wheel came in contact with the left front wheel of the Hill car causing it to swerve to the north…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Fosbroke v. National Exchange BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Peterson v. DollSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931

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

Powered by the Exa API