Anderson v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.

185 N.W. 299, 150 Minn. 530, 1921 Minn. LEXIS 851
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedNovember 25, 1921
DocketNo. 22,494
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 185 N.W. 299 (Anderson v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Anderson v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co., 185 N.W. 299, 150 Minn. 530, 1921 Minn. LEXIS 851 (Mich. 1921).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appeal from a judgment of the St. Louis district court.

This case was here before on the appeal of the defendants from an order denying their alternative motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial. The decision is reported in 146 Minn. 430, 179 N. W. [531]*53145. On the going down of the mandate judgment was entered in the court below on November 29, 1920, upon the verdict theretofore rendered. This appeal is from that judgment.

After the appeal, as shown by the records of this court, the appeal of the defendant railroad company was dismissed. The only defendant now present upon this appeal is Walker D. Hines, director general of railroads.

The assignments of error include those made on the former hearing and certain additional ones. All have had our attention. We have considered the claim of the defendant, specifically made, that G. S. 1913, §§ 3795, 4426, relative to the operation of railroads, imposing in certain cases an absolute liability, are not applicable to the director general, and hold against his contention. This is in accord with our understanding of our prior decision, With this statement added, and following the former decision, the judgment is affirmed.

We may add that anything that occurred in the court below after the judgment relative to a substitution of the agent of the president is not before us on this appeal.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Kyriss v. State
707 P.2d 5 (Montana Supreme Court, 1985)
Hollister v. Ulvi
271 N.W. 493 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
185 N.W. 299, 150 Minn. 530, 1921 Minn. LEXIS 851, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anderson-v-minneapolis-st-paul-sault-ste-marie-railway-co-minn-1921.