The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1902-11-14

get out of here. You came in to see what YOU
could find to steal" zas
cause of action. c
the trial that case was made which should
have been submitted to the jury
. Order in both cases reversed and a new trial
s<' . Sets Aside aVerdict.
A verdict against the Eastern Mime
sofa, secured in Hennepin county, Is set
aside, in the following: -, .S=E + r.. =,
Peter Boyer. respondent VS.. Eastern Railway
Company of Minnesota. appellant. -
from nat cars Y is not attended with extra haz.
yards involved In such complicated and OBJ
scure conditions to require the formulation
of rules for the conduct of the business of Its
employees -. -. :.-A. ...-r =. ...
Second-Where a servant is ordered with
other employees to unload logs from fiat cars
where the risk arising from the incidental per-
forn1ance of the work Is open and apparent to
observation he assumes the dangers caused by
the negligence of fellow servants.
Third-Allegations Of the complaint in this
case considered and held that the work de-
scribed therein was Of usual and customary
servation and that an injury resulting in the
performance Of the work by fellow servant
incident, to the common employment and rem
ediless Order reversed Lovely, J.
Other decisions were handed down to-
day as follows: -. 80, d
Watonwan County. ..~
George F. Rice appellant, VS.. Madelia Farmers
Warehouse Co.. ct a., respondents.
Henry Cooling, appellant, vs.. same parties, re-
.'Unfaithfulness'' in the transaction Of the
business of corporation by officer. director
stakeholder. for which he may be held liable
for corporate debts as provided in Gen. st. 1894.
Sec. 26OO Subd. B, must be something more
than mere neglect arising out OF failure to
carefully oversee and superintend corporate af-
fairs upon strict business principles; such a
! failure as may really and solely be attributable
Ioo1y of h,,Sj
lions.
Held, upon an examination Of the evidence
in this case, that the defendants are not liable
for corporate debts under the provisions OF said
section 26OO
Order affirmed. Collins, J.
Redwood County.
Richard Peach, appellant, vs.. Ed Reed re-
On appeal from judgment, where there is no
bill Of exceptions or settled case, the only cues
ton which will be reviewed is whether the find
ings Of facts by the judge. or the verdict Of the
jury. as the case may be, sustains the judg-
ment If the facts established by either are not
within the issues made by the pleadings, they
will be presumed, the record not showing other
wise, to have been litigated by consent. and the
Judgment affirmed. start, y. D..
Stevens County.
Henry sherwood. respondent. VS.. H. L. jenkins
Lumber company, appellant.
In this, personal injury action, 1t IS helo:
First-The verdict is sustained by the evil
| dence. go
Second-The trial court did not err In It's rul-
nrs rs to the admission of evidence.
| Third-The defendant cannot avail itself OF an
alleged cham pertous contract either as defense
| or by bringing it to the attention of the court
| and securing a dismissal of the action.
| Order affirmed Start O. j..
Stearns County.
William WINNER, appellant, vs. ]. A. Key, re-
! spondent.
| Account books are inadmissible in evidence as
! proof of an alleged Indebtedness, unless the pro-
visions Of G. S. 1894, section 573S, are substan-
| TALLY complied with. .
Judgment affirmed. Per CURTAIN
Hennepin County.
| Charles J. Johnson, respondent, vs. Joseph H.
! Martin and Chandler G. Wyman, appellants.
First-In an action, for conversion, brought
| against factor by the true owner OF personal
| property which has come to the possession OF the
| former by the criminal act Of another person has
| been sold by him, the proceeds received and paid
over to the criminal, less expenses and com.
mission, it is defense that the factor acted
| throughout the entire transaction in good faith,
| without negligence, and in the superstition that
| the criminal was the real owner of the prop.
| erty. =,
| Second-The owner may recover Its value OF
| the factor although common carrier. was
guilty Of negligence in permitting the prop
| erty to be diverted from its true destination by
and h