Lund v. Great Northern Railway Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Lund v. Great Northern Railway Co.

148 N.W. 112, 126 Minn. 259, 1914 Minn. LEXIS 629

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedJuly 3, 1914

DocketNos. 18,653—(193)

StatusPublished

This text of 148 N.W. 112 (Lund v. Great Northern 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

Lund v. Great Northern Railway Co., 148 N.W. 112, 126 Minn. 259, 1914 Minn. LEXIS 629 (Mich. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Bunn, J.

Action to recover damages to horses shipped by plaintiff over defendant’s lines from Appleton, Minnesota, to Buxton, North Dakota. There was a verdict for plaintiff in the sum of $175. A motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial was denied and defendant appealed.

[260]*260The assignments of error question the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict, and the amount of the damages.

There was the usual evidence of the fine condition of the horses when loaded for shipment, and of their injured condition when unloaded at destination. In addition the horses were held upon the car at the end of the transit without food or water two hours longer than is permitted by the Federal statute. Defendant concedes that this last fact alone makes a prima facie case of negligence. There was also some evidence, not very definite or persuasive, of unusual jolts and bumps en route. The evidence was such that the verdict of the jury, sustained by the trial court, necessarily concludes us. We are clearly not warranted in saying that the prima facie case made was rebutted by defendant, or in finding that the amount of damages fixed by the jury is in excess of what the evidence as to damage warranted.

Order affirmed.

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

Bunn, J.

Action to recover damages to horses shipped by plaintiff over defendant’s lines from Appleton, Minnesota, to Buxton, North Dakota. There was a verdict for plaintiff in the sum of $175. A motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial was denied and defendant appealed.

[260]*260The assignments of error question the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict, and the amount of the damages.

There was the usual evidence of the fine condition of the horses when loaded for shipment, and of their injured condition when unloaded at destination. In addition the horses were held upon the car at the end of the transit without food or water two hours longer than is permitted by the Federal statute. Defendant concedes that this last fact alone makes a prima facie case of negligence. There was also some evidence, not very definite or persuasive, of unusual jolts and bumps en route. The evidence was such that the verdict of the jury, sustained by the trial court, necessarily concludes us. We are clearly not warranted in saying that the prima facie case made was rebutted by defendant, or in finding that the amount of damages fixed by the jury is in excess of what the evidence as to damage warranted.

Order affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

148 N.W. 112, 126 Minn. 259, 1914 Minn. LEXIS 629, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lund-v-great-northern-railway-co-minn-1914.