St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1889-01-31

deadly poison, without labelling it
poison" as required by the law, and
that she, ignorant of Its deadly quail
ties, partook of the poison, which
caused her death. The syllabus in this
case states:
Syllabus-Where statute or munich
pal ordinance imposes upon a person a
duty designed for the protection of
others, if he neglectS to perform the
duty, he is liable to those for whose
protection it was imposed. for any dam
ages resulting proXimately from such
neglect, and of the character which the
statute or ordinance was designed to
prevent. Following Bott VS.. Pratt, SO
Mimi, 1923. Whether the act cOnstitut-
ing negligence was such on common
law principles, or is made such by
statute, the doctrine of agency applies,
to wit, that the master is liable for the
negligence of his servant committed in
the course of his employment, and re-
Sulting in injury to others. Judgment
affirmed. MITCHELL, j.
Gilfillan, G. j.. because of affinity to
one of the parties, took no part in this
case.
In the damage suit of Catherine Koer-
per ct al, appellants, VS.. The st. Paul
IL Northern Pacific Railway Company,
the supreme court reversed the order of
the trial court of Hennepin county.
This was an action to recover possession
of certain real property, and damages
for Withholding the same. The wrong
full possession and withholding alleged
consisted of defendants constructing
and operating its road across the prem
ises. The syllabus reads:
SyllabuS-General Statutes 1878, chap
ter 66. section 262, gives the plaintiff the
right to dismiss his action at any time
before trial ''if a provisional remedy
has been allowed or counterclaim made
or affirmative relief demanded in the
answer" Held, that affirmative re-
liet'' is only that for which defendants
might maintain an action independently
of plaintiffs claim, and which he might
proceed to recover, although plaintiff
abandoned his cause of action or
failed to establish it. In an
action against a railroad company
to recover land upon which it had built
its road, the answer of the company set
up title in itself, but alleged-pursuan
to General Statutes, 1878, chapter 81.
sections SO 3S-its readiness and will
ingneSS to pay the plaintiff for the land,
provided, on the trial he established his
the relief demanded in the answer was
not affirmative" within the meaning
of the statute. Where a party has re-
corded conveyance of real estate in
the county where the land is then stu
ated, subsequent change of county
boundaries does not of itself impose
upon him the duty of again recording
the conveyance in another county
within which the premises may happen
to fall by reason of such change.
Neither was any such duty imposed by
General Laws. 1875, chapter 51-Generai
Statutes, 1878, chapter 40, section q.
Order reversed and action dismissed.
MITCHELL, j.
Bernt Hannem. respondent, VS.. J. W.
Pence, appellant.
Syllabus-The owner of a lot abut-
ting on public street in city has no
right to erect building on it with
roof so constructed that ice and snow
collecting OH 1t will naturally and prob
below. thereby exposing foot passen-
gers to bodily injury. And if he does
so construct it, he is liable, without
other proof OF negligence, to a person
injured by the falling snow or ice,
while travelling Oh the sidewalk with
due care. 1t is no defense in such
case that he exercised all the diligence
and care he could to remove the snow
and ice from the roof. The gist of the
negligence in such case consists, not
in the management of the roof, but in
its improper and unsafe construction.
Order affirmed. MITCHELL, }.
Philip S. Harris, respondent, VS.. Cor
lies, Chapman & Drake, appellants.
Syllabus-A lease of a building con-
tanned a provision that if at any time
during the term the demised premises
SHOULD be rendered partially unten-
antabie by fire or the elements" but
the business of the lessee could still be
conducted therein, while the same
were being repaired, then the lessee
should repair the same as soon
as practicable, the occupancy of
the lesseeU to continue during such
repairs, and for such occupancy
he should pay the fair value until the
repairs were completed and thereafter
the rent stipulated in the lease, as if
no such disturbance had occurred.
During the term the basement of the
building became so wet and unhealthy
as to be untenantable, by reason of
springs of water oozing and percolating
through and under the basement walls.
Held, that the basement was not ren-
dered untenantable by the elements,
within the meaning of the lease. That
it refers only to some sudden, unusual
OF unexpected action of the elements,
as floods, tornadoes and the like, oc-
curing during the term and not to the
natural and ordinary results of an eff
cient cause existing at the time of the
demise, such as the manner of conStruc-
ton of the building or the nature of the
soil upon which it was erected. judy
ment affirmed. MITCHELL, j.
Martin County VS.. A. NJ. Drake; Muir
ray County VS.. Minnesota Loan Co.
Syllabus-The revenue laws of this
state have fixed May as the date for
determining the taXability of property
and its ownership and value for pur-
poses of taxation for the year. Hence
lands of railway company, which are
exempt from taxation until sold and
conveyed" if conveyed before May l,
are subject to taxation for the then cur
rent year. If not conveyed until after
that date, they are not. Judgment
affirmed. MITCHELL, j.
Supreme Court Summary.
The routine of the supreme court yes
terday was as follows:
The st. Paul & Sioux City Railway
Company, appellant, VS.. E. 3. Shuanks
and County Auditor, etc, ct al, re-
SpondentS; The st. Paul & Sioux City
~