Crosby v. St. Paul City Railway Co.
This text of 26 N.W. 225 (Crosby v. St. Paul City 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.
Opinion
This action was brought to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been suffered by plaintiff through the negligence of defendant in the management of one of its -cars [414]*414upon which plaintiff was a passenger, and while she was in the act of alighting therefrom. The issues were tried before a jury, and submitted to them upon the testimony introduced in behalf of the respective parties. A new trial was granted by the court, on the ground that the verdict was not justified by the evidence.
It is not important to review the testimony in detail. It is sufficient to say that we have carefully considered it after argument by counsel, and are of the opinion that a new trial on this ground was fairly within the discretion of the trial court, under the rule governing such cases, as laid down and followed in numerous decisions in this court. Hicks v. Stone, 13 Minn. 398, (434;) Rheiner v. Stillwater Street Ry. Co., 29 Minn. 147; Fox v. Burke, 29 Minn. 171; Pratt v. Pioneer Press Co., 30 Minn. 41; Wilcox v. Landberg, 30 Minn. 93; Young v. Davis, 30 Minn. 293; Carlson v. Small, 32 Minn. 439; Clapp v. Minn, & St. L. Ry. Co., 33 Minn. 22.
Order affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
26 N.W. 225, 34 Minn. 413, 1886 Minn. LEXIS 7, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crosby-v-st-paul-city-railway-co-minn-1886.