Perry v. Chicago Great Western Railroad
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 1973, 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
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- Couture v. Novotny (Minn. 1973)
- White v. Holmes (Fla. 1925)
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
Plaintiff while in the employ of the defendant suffered an inguinal hernia and recovered a verdict of $3,366. The only question is whether it is excessive.
There was evidence at the trial that an operation would likely be effective and that a cure would result within a few months. The operation was an abdominal one which has an element of risk or of unsatisfactory result. No issue was made at the trial or submitted to the jury whether an operation would safely remove his trouble, or whether it was his reasonable duty to submit to an operation. Nothing was submitted to the jury, aside from the question of liability, except the amount of damages which should be awarded for the injury. Following and applying Maroney v. Minneapolis & St. L. R. Co. 123 Minn. 480, 144 N. W. 149, 49 L. R. A. (N. S.) 756, and in
Order affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.