The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1903-02-06
FRIDAY EVENING,

the United States that "full faith and credit
shall be given in each state to the public acts,
records and judicial proceedings Of every other
state, Is applicable only when the court rem.
dering Judgment or in which the proceedings
are had has jurisdiction of the parties and of
ment rendered, or '' proceedings had, BY the
court of one state against nonresident debtor
in the absence of personal service. upon him,
Collins, j.
Elevator Boy Receivers Damages.
Charles Lyons RECEIVERS $3.50 damages
from Dee Brothers, proprietors of hotel
on ,Hennepin avenue, Minneapolis Lyons
was an elevator boy in their employ. and
on March q, 1901 left the elevator $on an
upper floor. A guest stepped in and too
the car up A guest stepped into the shaft
and FELL breaking his back. The supreme
court upholds the verdict in the follow
ing syllabus:
Charles Lyons, by Jonas Well, his guardian ad
litem, respondent. vs.. John Doe and Joseph
Doe copartners as Doe Brothers, appellants
First--Where the managers of hotel main
tain and operate an elevator therein placing the
same In charge Of an attendant a permission to
use such elevator by guests for their own cons
venience, II injury arises to third party there
from may justify an action against the proprie-
tors at the suit Of a person who suffers the
same.
Second an action where the person in
charge of such elevator is injured in falling
by he received injuries, held, that the evidence
reasonably sustains the following conclusions;
Ca That the had no nose Of
the guests to operate the elevator for their own
Ib) That the attendant who was injured did
not under the facts assume the risk of such
custom.
(c) That tile party injured was not, as a
matter of law guilty of contributory negii7
Thrd-An intoxicated person receiving injuries
from recovery but his mental condition, so fan
as it affects the exercise of care on his part Is
question Of fact to be considered by the jury
Fourth-Feld upon the proofs showing thai
where one of the jurymen; selected to try ut
issue Of negligence made casual inspection OF
the premises. that fact did not as a matter OF
! law require the trial court to set aslde the yer
| dict and grant new trial.
Order affirmed Ho'eA'' o.
Evidence Wrongly Admitted.
I Harry v. Curry as the homestead owne
of a. piece of land on the south shore o
| Lake of the Woods. sued the Sandusk
Fish company for damages for unlawful
occupation of the premises. and secured
! verdict Of S2,45O. The court grants a nev
| trial on errors in admitting evidence t
show what profit the defendant cornpan
| might have had from the land. Judg
| Lovely rather caustically observes tina
the evidence of inexperienced witnesse
as to the high price of caviar was no
material. and predjudicial to the defend
ants The syllabus:
Harry v. Curry, respondent, vs.. Sandusky Els
| company. appellant. ..-l>. ID"
! First-Where damages are to be assessed TO
| the use of land unawfully withheld from til
person entitled to possession thereof. the latte
may recover the value Of its use for any legit
mate and proper purpose during the time he
| deprived of such use.
Second-Under the evidence in this case he'll
that the defendants We're 'prejudiced by til
statements of experts influenced by the result