Dahly v. Auxer

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Dahly v. Auxer

122 N.W. 1135, 108 Minn. 531, 1909 Minn. LEXIS 763

Supreme Court of Minnesota·Decided July 9, 1909·No. Nos. 16,199—(165)·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This record raises no questions which require extended consideration by this court. The respondent was injured while in the employ of the defendant, working in and about a mangle. In an action for damages she recovered a verdict for $1,500, and the appeal is from an order denying the defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, or for a new trial. The record contains no prejudicial error.

The case is affirmed upon the authority of Cody v. Longyear, 103 Minn. 116, 114 N. W. 735; Dizonno v. Great Northern Ry. Co. 103 Minn. 120, 123, 114 N. W. 736; Lohman v. Swift & Co., 105 Minn. 148, 117 N. W. 418; Doerr v. Daily News Pub. Co., 97 Minn. 248, 106 N. W. 1044.

Order affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

This record raises no questions which require extended consideration by this court. The respondent was injured while in the employ of the defendant, working in and about a mangle. In an action for damages she recovered a verdict for $1,500, and the appeal is from an order denying the defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, or for a new trial. The record contains no prejudicial error.

The case is affirmed upon the authority of Cody v. Longyear, 103 Minn. 116, 114 N. W. 735; Dizonno v. Great Northern Ry. Co. 103 Minn. 120, 123, 114 N. W. 736; Lohman v. Swift & Co., 105 Minn. 148, 117 N. W. 418; Doerr v. Daily News Pub. Co., 97 Minn. 248, 106 N. W. 1044.

Order affirmed.

Dahly v. Auxer, 122 N.W. 1135, 108 Minn. 531, 1909 Minn. LEXIS 763 (Mich. 1909).

Pincite

122 N.W. 1135 (Dahly v. Auxer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related