Minnesota Supreme Court, 1884

Clapp v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.

Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided December 19, 1884

33 Minn. 22; 21 N.W. 844; 1884 Minn. LEXIS 62 (Minnesota Reports)

Counsel

Cordon E. Cole and J. H. Parker, for appellant., J. D. Springer, for respondent.

Can I rely on this case?

Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.

(as of 9/30/2026)

Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1921, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.

Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error

Cases that cite this one

4 later published cases cite this decision.

Olson v. United States (8th Cir. 1933)
Outcelt v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad (Minn. 1921)
Rennie v. Skellett Co. (Minn. 1921)
Crosby v. St. Paul City Railway Co. (Minn. 1886)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

By the Court.

The issue tried before the jury was whether the ac*23cident to plaintiff’s intestate was caused by the defendant’s negligence in allowing a certain railroad switch to remain out of repair and in an unsafe condition. A new trial was granted by the court, on the sole ground that the verdict was not justified by the evidence. This was one of the statutory grounds on which the motion was made, and upon the record of the evidence on both sides we think the case is clearly within the rule laid down in Rheiner v. Stillwater, etc., Co., 29 Minn. 147, in the application of which this court will not reverse the order of the trial court granting a new trial upon the evidence, (where it does not preponderate in favor of the verdict,) irrespective of the question whether there may or may not have been some evidence to support the verdict.

Order affirmed.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.