Minnesota Supreme Court, 1931

Klugman v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.

Klugman v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.
Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided June 19, 1931 · PER CURIAM.
237 N.W. 420; 183 Minn. 541; 1931 Minn. LEXIS 986 (North Western Reporter)

Counsel

Leonard, Street Deinard and Hyman Edelman , for relator. Durham Lystad , for respondent employer and Globe Indemnity Company, its insurer.

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 1936, 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

Klugman v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.

Cases that cite this one

4 later published cases cite this decision.

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

Per Curiam.

Certiorari to the industrial commission to review an order denying workman’s compénsation.

The injury, if it occurred as relator claims, was serious. It resulted in the loss of vision of the right eye, that of the left having gone some time before, so that relator is now totally blind.

*542 We have examined the record with care, but without finding-ground upon which to disturb the order under review. It is a question whether the evidence compels a finding that there was any injury. There is the other question of causation. The burden of proof was on relator. Much medical testimony, with no inherent unsoundness, is to the effect that if he suffered the accident which he said he did it is bhrely possible but quite improbable that it caused the loss of vision. With the evidence in such shape on a crucial issue, the finding against relator by the triers of the facts cannot be disturbed. For citation of authorities, see Jones v. Excelsior Laundry Co. 183 Minn. 531, 237 N. W. 419.

Order affirmed.

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