Legal Opinion

Sobieski v. St. Paul & Duluth Railroad

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 2, 1889PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for St. Louis county, Stearns, J.; presiding, refusing a new trial after ver•dict of $7,000 for plaintiff.

1Opinion of the CourtDickinson, J.

This action is to recover for personal injuries suffered by the plaintiff from being run over by a locomotive of the defendant at its station grounds in Duluth. The principal question which we have been called upon to consider is whether the case shows •contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff, so that the verdict in his favor cannot be sustained. The claim of the plaintiff that the engine by which he was injured was started from a stationary position near the place of the accident, and run until he was struck, *170without any signal by bell or otherwise, is so.well sustained by the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Hinkle v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1884

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Och v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1895
  2. Citizens' Street Railroad v. HortonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1897
  3. Knock v. Tonopah & Goldfield RailroadNevada Supreme Court · 1914
  4. Carlin v. KennedySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
  5. Larson v. HaglinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API