St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1893-09-09
TUE CITY RESPONSIBLE
FOR DAMAGES 0ccASI0KED BY TIE
WEST SIDE DISASTER.
JUDGMENToE SUPREME COURT

Appeal Of the City A2ainstDecis-
ion of Lower Court Defeated
Dissenting Opinions in a
Guardianship Case - Several
Rulings OF Interest ON In.
volyed Law Points.
The supreme court yesterday handed
down eleven decisions and denied a
number of requests for re-argument of
cases. In two cases the courts below
were reversed; in all others they were
affirmed. In one case Chief Justice
GilfIlan and Justice Collins filed dis
senting opinions.
In the case OF Catherine Stoehr against
the City of ST. Paul. in which she OBJ
tanned damages in the Ramsey county
district court on account of the break
inr away of the Page street fill, by
which a large volume of water ran
down the raviue, the order of the dis
trict court is sustained, and the city
stands defeated. Following are the syl-
abb:
Catherine Stoehr Respondent, VS.. City of
ST. Paul, Appellant. Order affirmed
NANDERBURGH, j.
Syllabas-The, defendant, i'll grading
a street, encountered a ravlne, across
which it was found necessary to raise
an embankment on the line OF the
street. In this ravine a large amount
OF surface water is collected and car
lied off during each year. In the plans
and specifications TOR the improvement
adopted by the defendant, and in order
to provide suitable drainage for the
waters Naturally collecting in the ra-
vine, a culvert or sluiceway was con-.
structed in the channel thereof, under
the embankment. Held that in the
maintenance of the embankment as con-
structed, (which might create reservoir
of water above it dangerous to persons
and property in the ravine below unless
ne culvert was kept open, 1t was the
duty of defendant to exercise reasonable
Care and diligence 10 keep the same
open and to prevent an accident from
such collection of water or the under
mining and destruction of the embauk-
ment thereby.
Evidence held to disclose negligence
on the part of the defendant in failing
to keep open a sluiceway under such
embankment. resulting in the accident
complained Of.
JUDGES DIFFER.
George F.. Plympton. by Andrew S. Keyes,
his Guardian, respondent, vs.: William
Hall teal, defendants, Israel w. Cone,
appellant. Order affirmed
VANDERBURGH, j.
Sylabus-Where persons are inca
pable OF acting for themselves, rs in the
case of lunaticS, they are entitled TO the
protection of the court, and proceedings
will be instituted under its direction.
Suits may be brought in their name, and
the court will authorize some suitable
person to carry it OH as next friend or
guardian ad litem.
The power of the district courts 10
exercise such authority is not taken
away by the provisions of the general
statutes authorizing the probate courts
10 appoint general guardians for insane
persons. But it is i'll the discretion of
the court to allow an action SO instituted
topr0ceed or not. and it Inlay order a stay
of proceedings to await the due APP
ponntneIft of a general guardian, or
order the same TO be discontinued, as it
may be advised.
Gillian, &. il dissent. However
it may be in respect to the power or
the district court 10 appoint guardian
ad litem, 10 prosecute an action in be-
half of a resident insane person. do
not think il can be done for nOn-resi-
dent, over whose person the courts of
this state have no Jurisdiction. And
such was this case.
Collins, il concur in the dissenting
opinion Of the chief JUSTICE.
A CONTRACT DEFECTIVE.
Wisconsin Red Pressed Brick Company. an
pellant vs.. David Hood ct al, respondents
Order reversed. COLLINS, j.
> s-First-Plaintiff ana Ii, one
of the defendants, entered into written
contract whereby the former agreed to
furnish and the latter to receive GER
tain quantity of bricks at a stipulated
price per thousand "ot the grade known
as common BRICK" all to be ''Of good
quality and equal to sample sent"
There was no finding of the court in
reference TO the sample. Held. disre-
garding thiSsQmSSOn in the findings,
that there was no implied warranty In
the safe that the bricks 10 be furnished
should De reasonably fit for the purpose
for which they were purchased, OF
which purpose plaintiff was advised.
Second-Held, also, that certain find
ings of fact herein, based upon the
assumption that such a warranty exist
ed, did NOT Justify the conclusion of law.
RIGHTS OF WAREHoUSEMEN.
Farwell Farmers Warehouse Association, re-
spondent, VS.. Minneapolis. St. Paul d
Sault ste. Marie Railway Company, appel
can't. Judgment affirmed.
VANDERBURGH, j.
Syllabus-By chapter 10, section 2,