St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1888-09-25
SUPREME COURT DEGREES.
Railroad Corporations and the Mill City
Interested.
KILLED AT AN ELEVATOR.
Judge Collins Submits Four Decisions
on Long Pending
Cases.

yesterday nleu TOUR decisions.
Thomas Buckley, appellant, VS.. Robert
n. Patterson and Ii. S. Patterson:
Judgment for costs and disbursements
in favor of defendant having been en-
tered in an action to compel specific
performance of a contract to sell land,
plaintiff appealed. The correctness of
the findings of fact upon which said
Judgment was based were not queS-
toned. and from them it appeared that
Dec. %, 1856, defendants were owners
of two lots in st. Paul, worth s., 500 each,
and daily increasing in value. Bushnell
* Bushnell, engaged in the real estate
business as brokers and agents, we'll
knew the value of the property, and on
said day they sent defendants clerk or
agent (whO knew nothing of said value)
sOlicitingfrnm them authorityto sell upon
commission. Defendants consented that
Bushnell IL Bushnell should have au..
thority to sell said lots for the period of
sixty days at $1,000 net for each. De
PENDANTS signed an agreement auth0rlZ-
ing the sale of the lots, the contents OF
which the clerk hurriedly read or
stated. Feb. IL, 1887, Bushnell d Bush
nell contracted in writing to sell both
lots TO plaintiff for the sum of 50, 125, re-
SSA'AAe5s pun hiSib NAcSS nv
ton of which was paid defendants. De-
PENDANTS learning of the sale, repudi-
ated it, because of the mistake made in
the writing given to Bushnell d Bush
nell, wherein they were authorized to
-, sell the lots for the sum of three thou
sand one hundred and twenty-five dol
lars" Judge Collins remarked upon
this case: 1--WE are here called upon to
exercise equitable powers. and to com
pei the performance of a contract to
convey real estate founded upon mis-
take made by the defendants when Gre
ating Bushnell & Bushnell their agents
for the sale of the property in question.
1t is we'll established that party can
be relieved of a contract founded on his
mistake when it is such one as will
render its performance harsh and i'll
equitable. if the parties can be restored
to their original position"
Thomas Buckley, appellant, VS.. Robert
II. Patterson and Ii. 5. Patterson, re-
SpondentS.
Syllabus: 1t the parties can be re-
stored to their original position court
of equity will not interfere to sustain a
bill where it would be against con-
science and justice to do so. 1t may re-
fuse to grant the peculiar remedy of
specific performance of a contract to
convey real estate entered into by de-
PENDANT under mistake, although the
plaintiff was not party to the miSap-
prehensiOn nor implicated in its origin.
In all cases the error must be plain and
the proof strong and irrefragable.
When the court refuses to decree Spe-
cific performance of such a contract
upon the ground that it was entered into
10y mistake, and that its performance
would prove harsh and inequitable, it is
the duty of the court to pass upon and
assess plaintiffs damages in the same
action. Decision reversed and new trial
granted.
Charles c. Bennett, administrator of
estate of GuStave Brown, appellant,
VS.. Syndicate Insurance Company ct
al, respondents.
This action was brOugot to recover
damages for alleged negligence result
ing in the death of Gustav Brown.
Upon the trial, after receiving all teSti-
mOny, verdict for defendant was Or
dered by the court, although it had,
when plaintiff rested his case, refused
nOnsuit. Brown was killed while en-
ployed by defendants removing wheat
from the debris of the st. Anthony ele-
Vator at Minneapolis, which was de-
stoyed by fire July -, 1887.
Syllabus-The rule as to the general
duty of the master to exercise care to
prevent the exposure of his servant to
unnecessary and unreasonable risks, as
laid down in Cook VS.. st. Paul, NJ. 81 NJ.
Co., "a Mimi, 45. applied to this case.
AS stated in Albeit VS.. c., NJ. ~ st. p.
Co., 80 MINI. 4S2, the question of negli-
gence is ordinarily one for the jury. and
always so when the evidence is conflict
ing, or when the facts are undisputed,
but different minds might reasonably
draw different conclusions from them.
Under this definition the trial court was
not warranted in directing a verdict for
defendants in this case. Order refusing
new trial reversed.
Rufus j. Baldwin. respondent. VS..
George r. Robinson ct al. appellants.
In 1857 the plaintiff acquired one acre
of land just outside the town site of
Minneapolis, upon which he then built
and has ever since resided. By means
of an exchange the tract of land was, in
1877. reduced in size and changed in
form. so that when defendant COM
menced proceedings to subject a part