St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-02-26
SMITH UP A STUMP
The Engineer Loses His Suit
: Ag ainst the Duluth Rail-
road.
LOWER COURT REVERSED
And Smiths Discharge by the
Company Is Declared JUS
tifiable.
LOWER COURT REVERSED
CONTRACT WAS VIOLATED
Six Decisions Handed Down
by the Supreme Court
Yesterday.

Six decisions were handed down by
the supreme court yesterday, four
of which were written by Justice
Buck and two by Justice Collins.
An important case is that of Charles
L. Smith against the st. Paul & Du-
luth Railroad company, in which the
findings of the jury in the lower
court are reversed. Smith was an
engineer on the road, and brought
suit for damages, alleging that he
had been injured by defective lever
on the engine. On condition that he
released all claims for damages the
company agreed to give him en-
ployment as long as he was able to
work. He was discharged finally for
alleged drunkenness, and brought
suit against the company for breach
of contract. The company fought
the case on two grounds. First, that
the contract was violated, because
it was notmutual, and second, that
his drinking disabled him for serv-
ice. The jury brought in verdict
for Smith on the ground that the evil
dence did not. sustain the charges
as to drinking to excess. The SUI
preme court finds that the COM.
pany was justified in discharging
Smith, and reverses the order of the
court below. The syllabus follows:
Charles l.. Smith, respondent, VS.. st.
Paul & Duluth Railroad Company, APP
pellant. l. Where an employee in con-
Slderation of an agreement on the part
of the employer to give him work as
long as he is able to perform it, re-
leases a claim for damages said to
have been caused by the employers
negligence, the agreement is not void
because lacking mutually. By re-
leasing his claim the employee has paid
in advance for an optional contract,
and he has the right to have it re-
main optional.
2. ANY conduct on the part of a rail
way engineer in respect to the use OF
intoxicating liquors which to retain
him would render it negligence on the
part of railway company towards it's
passengers, constitutes good and suffi-
cient ground for the engineers dis
charge.
8. Held, that the verdict in the case
was not sustained by the evidence
Order reversed. COLLINS, J.
Other decisions were as follows:
CREATES NO LIEN.
Elizabeth Pfefferle and Richard Pfef-
ferle, her husband respondents, VS..
Christian Wieland, defendant, appel
liant, Henry Mueller eft al, intervenors,
appellants. Syllabus-A person who
pays taxes upon land prior to the time
when he becomes an occupant thereof,
under the occupying claimant law, is not
entitled to alien therefor upon such land
by reason of his subsequent bona fide
occupation of the premises under color
of title. Judgment affirmed.
BUCK, J.
AS TO PARTNERSHIP.
D. S. Hardin, G. D. Hardin and John
d. K. Smith, surviving partners ETC.,
appellants, VS.. Alexander Jamison re-
spondent. Syllabus-1. Where one part
ner purchases real estate with part
nership funds and takes the title in
his own name, he will be deemed a
trustee holding such title for the ben
eft Of the partnership.
2. Whenever partnership property is
traced into the hands and possession of
an individual partner, the burden is.
upon him to show why it should not
be treated as partnership assets.
8. Where there are more than two
co-partners, one of them cannot con-
vey or release to another partner val
liable partnership property without the
knowledge or consent of the other
partners. Order reversed.
BUCK, J.
VERDICT EXCESSIVE.
Louis Frederickson, respondent, vs. AL
bert Johnson, appellant. BUCK, j.
1. Where dafamatory words Of the
same import as those sued upon are re-
peated upon several occasions prior to
the time of publishing the defamatory
words alleged in the complaint, they
may be shown and are admissible in
evidence on the trial to show malice,
whether they are addressed to third
persons or to the person DETAINED.
2. Words which impute to a person
the guilt of a criminal offense, and
where their meaning is apparent on
the face of the defamation itself, an
innuendo in reference to the meaning
of such words is surplusage.
8. The verdict Of the jury in behalf
of plaintiff for the sum of $1,000 held ex-
cessive, and that a new trial should
be granted unless the plaintiff consent
to remit all the same in excess of So, 900.
LOWER COURT ERRED.
William H. Sexton, appellant, VS.. Will
lam E. Steele eft al, defendants, Will
lam E. Steele, respondent. Order re-
versed. COLLINS, J.
Held, that the trial court erred when
at the close of the evidence it dismissed
the case as to respondent on appeal.
TRIAL COURT JUSTIFIED.
Gaar, Scott & Co., corporation, appel
liant, VS.. Edward Fritz and Adam
Fritz, respondents. Order affirmed.
BUCK, J.
Upon the pleadings and evidence in
this case, held, that when the plaintiff
rested, the trial court was justified in
dismissing the action.