Crosby v. St. Paul City Railway Co.

Minnesota Supreme Court
Crosby v. St. Paul City Railway Co., 34 Minn. 413 (Minn. 1886)
26 N.W. 225; 1886 Minn. LEXIS 7
Vanderburgh

Can I rely on this case?

Yes — no negative treatment found

Based on 2 citing opinions

Analysis generated from citing opinions in this archive. Not legal advice.

Crosby v. St. Paul City Railway Co.

Opinion of the Court

Vanderburgh, J.

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 *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.

Reference

Full Case Name
Lizzie I. Crosby v. St. Paul City Railway Company
Cited By
2 cases
Status
Published