The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1896-12-29
SIX ARE REVERSED
BUT MAMIE LANES VERDICT
AGAINST THE STATE FAIR
is AFFIRMED.
THEIR ACCOUNT SUSTAINED.
ST. PAUL TRUST CO.'S CARE OF
kITTSON PROPERTY IS LEGAL
LY APPROVED.
TWO JUSTICES Do NOT SHARE
In the Opinion Expressed by the
Court in an Insolvency Proceed
ing--Other Cases

Sixteen decisions were handed down
In the supreme court yesterday, and
1T was a bad day for the judges Of the
trial courts, six of them being reversed
In the case of most general interest,
however. locally, at least, the trial
court was affirmed, and Mamie Lane
can now collect her verdict against the
state agricultural society for the in
JuT1es she received in a race at thu,
Ialr OF two years ago Mamie rode
an untractable horse. The society. or
one OF its officers, knew Of the danger
Gus tendencies of the steed, but let her
ride 1t. The defendant claimed that
the officers knowledge did not bind tho
society, and that the trial court had
no right to admit evidence as to that
knowledge. The supreme court decides
that it did right. The syllabus is as
follows: 10
Mamie Lane respondent VS.. Minnesota c+o+o
Agricultural Society. appellant
l. Seven separate requests for instructions
10 the jury were made by the defendant in
TINS case, several of which were erroneous
and all were refused except as given in the
general charge. The only exception taken
10 the action OF the court was to the effect
that the defendant excepts to the refusal
to give those portions of the requests which
the court refused and which are not COW
cred by the general charge. Held, that the
exception insufficient as a basis for anv
assignment of error.
2 The basis of the plaintiffs cause of
action was the negligence of the defendant
in knowingly permitting a dangerous horse
track bolter, to in a race controlled
by 1t, and in which the plaintiff rode and
was injured, without infirming her of the
VICIOUS character of the horse, of which she
was ignorant. On the trial there was evil
dence tending to show that the horse to
the knowledge of one of the officers of the
defendant, would bolt in practice: also that
the horse came upon the race track wearing
blnkers. Held, that it was not error for
me trlaI court to receive evidence to show
that race horse which bolts in practice
will usually do so in an actual race; and,
further, for what purpose blinkers are put
on race horses.
g. Held further, that the trial court did
not err in sustaining an objection to a ques-
tlon intended to show the position of the
horses at the time plaintiff was injured for
the reason the witness had previously fully
and clearly testified upon and covered the
point. Order affirmed. Start, c. ].
One of Chief Justice Starts decisions
is in the two cases, Norman w. Kittson
against the ST. Paul Trust company
KittsOn and the Trust company each
won point in this appeal The decision
of the lower court is affirmed in eacn
case. The case had been remanded to
the district court to be retired upon
the question as to the proportion of
the daily balances of the Kittson estate
to the daily balances of all other trust
funds in charge of the company The
district court had retired the case on
this issue, determined the proportion
and settled the account on that basis.
The supreme court now affirms the or
der of the lower court, refusing a new
trial in each case The syllabus:
In re Estate of Norman w. Kittson, deceased.
respondent, VS.. St. Paul Trust Company
appellant.
In re appeal Of Norman Kittson ct al from
orders of Feb. &c, 1895, appellants, vs. The
st. Paul Trust Company, as executor, re-
spondent.
Upon a former appeal herein this court
remanded this to the district court with
directions to retry a particular issue and
settle the executors account in accordance
with the decision on such appeal. 65 N. W.
a. This was done, and the parties again
appealed from an order denying their re-
spective motions for a trial. Held that
no assignments of error can be considered
on this appeal as to matters involved in the
first one; held, further, that such retrial and
settlement of the account by the district
court were in accordance with the mandate
Of this court. Order affirmed on both ap-
peals. Start c. J.
A decision of much interest is that
in the action of John Hay as assignee
of Frank H. Page, respondent, VS.. Ed
ward O. Tuttle. appellant, a Minneap-
oils case. Chief Justice Start and
Judge Mitchell dissent from the opin-