The Minneapolis journal., 1905-11-17
SUPREME COURT

negligence Of the defendant in too rapidly
operating the machinery and the question of
the contributory negligence of, the defendant
in placing the side of his foot against the
belt of the revolving pulley to hold it on, was
for the jury. -
Order reversed. -Jaggard, j.
william Tweedie, appellant, vs. F. e. Olson.
Hardware and Furniture Company, ct. sal.,3
respondents. - -... '.-- . -,.f- - ss ~
Syllabus: The owner of certain premises
leased the same to two tenants as joint 1es-1
sees for a definite period with the privilege
of an additional term Held: 1t was necessary,
for both tenants to exercise the option to con-
tinue the lease upon the expiration OF the
original term, but such intention might be
expressed Jointly independently, or by re-
naming in possession: but when of the
joint tenants expressly informed the owner that
he refused to extend the lease jointly with,
his cotenant such cotenant having notice there
of; and the owner having acted upon such dec
laration, and within a reasonable time there
after having brought an action for possession
of the premises, he entitled to recover,
altho the other tenant had served notice that
he would remain under the terms of the lease.
Judgmnt reversed. Lewis, j.. =
Alvirna Grout. respondent, vs.. D. A. Stewart,
appellant.
Syllabus: An oral agreement to receive title
! to land by absolute conveyance from the owner,
and to hold thesame as security for money rad-
vanced to a purchaser of the land for the ,pur-
pose of making payments under his contract OF
purchase, is not contrary to the statute OF
frauds and may be specifically enforced against
the grantee Notwithstanding the purchaser is
in possession of the premises and his contract
of purchase is still in force against the owner.
| Certain rulings reviewed and found to contain
no errir
| Order affirmed. Lewis, j.
C. H. Wilcox, appellant, vs. Christina G. Berg
man and August Bergman, respondents.
Syllabus: first-Copies of the record of
deeds and other similar private writings made
in sister state admissible in evidence in
the courts of this state under the provisions of
Rev. Stat. U. S. Sec. 96O, when properly certi-
fed and authenticated.
Second-But they will be given such force
and effect only is given thereto by the law
of the state from which they taken: and it
must appear that the record was one which was
authorized and provided for by the statutes Of
Third-No presumption exists that the statu.
tory law of sister state is the same as that
Of this state. :
Order affirmed Brown, ]. .
Patrick Welch and John Gilmer, appelltnts,
Northern Pacific Railroad company, respond
;, Syllabus On defendants motion for judg
ment notwithstanding the verdict, the trial
court made an order granting the same, but
, coupled herewith further order that the
action be dismissed. Defendant accepted the
. order in it's entirety and caused Judgment of
dismissal to be entered, from which plaintiffs
e appeal Held, a. Whether the trial court has
authority to dismiss an action aftetr trial upon
0 a motion for judgment Notwithstanding the YER
> dict, guaere 60 That plaintiffs were not
e the dismissal had not been ordered, defendant.
e under the terms of the order made, would have
s been entitled to final Judgment on the ner:
o it's, and the order in fact favorable and
. not prejudicial to plaintiffs and must be af-
: firrned. - =,
=. Judgment affirmed. Brown, J.
= Kelly Peterson by his guardian ad 1item, Morton
. Peterson respondent, Andrew A. Storm,
. appellant
d Syllabus On appeal from judgment based
Il on an order refusing to vacate and set aside a
= previous order modifying clerks taxation Of
4 costs and disbursements, and for leave to file
It a proposed supplemental affidavit In support of
the original affidavit of costs and disbursements
l. involving as it does review of the exercise of
discretion by the trial court, cannot be consid-
cred when based upon record which is certi-
fed to by the clerk only, and which is not and
!. does not purport to be, settled case or bill
of exception
l. II Judgment affirmed. -Jaggard, J.
e Archie Caron respondent, vs.. Powers Simpson
II :eqmpany, appellant
al Syllabus: The relation of master and servant
e rests upon contract express implied, and
j. where there is dispute of fact as to whether
ff the contract Of employment was made with an
=. independent contractor or the employer of such
contractor it is for jury under proper instruc
l. t1ons, to determine the controversy.
n In this case, involving recovery for personal
~ Einjufies caused by alleged negligence there was
It. such dispute of fact concerning the party EN-
t ployinge, the plaintiff should have been sub
# Order affirmed = : -Jeggard T.
y The Danvers Farmers Elevator company, ap
J. pellant,-ys Charles johnson, respondent
ar Syllabus: In this, action to recover for the
n conversion of money, held that the findings of
e. 1act and decision Of the trial court are sus
y, tanned by the evidence.
- Order affirmed Start -CrJ
er . = -.
II Charles II. Dart, appellant, vs. Charles E. Rich
ardson ct al, defendants; James Mahoney re
- spondent
D. syllabus: The evidence considered end held 3.
!, sustain the order of the trial court
he judgment anlrmed. Elliott, ].
p NORTH SIDERS "AT HOME