Ayer v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad

8 Citing cases

  1. Ayer v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad

    189 Minn. 359 (Minn. 1933)   Cited 12 times
    Stating that an order granting a new trial after judgment has been entered vacates the verdict and the judgment even if the motion for a new trial did not ask for them to be vacated

    Reversed. See 187 Minn. 169, 224 N.W. 681, and 189 Minn. 90, 248 N.W. 749. F.W. Root, C.O. Newcomb, A.C. Erdall, and Catherwood, Hughes Alderson, for appellant.

  2. Ayer v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad

    248 N.W. 749 (Minn. 1933)   Cited 3 times

    Upon appeal to this court by the railroad company there was a reversal of the order denying its motion for a new trial. 187 Minn. 169, 244 N.W. 681. In the meantime judgment against plaintiff in favor of Beckel was entered pursuant to the verdict.

  3. Viebahn v. Gudim

    142 N.W.2d 80 (Minn. 1966)   Cited 2 times

    See, King v. International Lbr. Co. 156 Minn. 494, 497, 195 N.W. 450, 451; Thomas v. Murphy, 87 Minn. 358, 361, 91 N.W. 1097, 1098. Ayer v. Chicago, M. St. P. P. R. Co. 187 Minn. 169, 244 N.W. 681; Tiedje v. Haney, 184 Minn. 569, 239 N.W. 611; Booth v. Spindler, 261 Minn. 79, 86, 110 N.W.2d 889, 894. In June 1963, the plaintiffs, Frank and Marjorie Viebahn, consulted defendant Gudim Realty, Inc., with a view to purchasing a motel.

  4. State, by Lord, v. LaBarre

    96 N.W.2d 642 (Minn. 1959)   Cited 6 times

    Obviously, if the rental value of his lease before the taking was $16,000 and that amount represented the value after the taking, the lessee would have sustained no damages. If the jury's answer to special interrogatory 2 is taken at its face value, it would follow that the full $20,000 award should have been for the benefit of the feeholders, but in the answer to interrogatory 1-b, the jury determined that the damage to the feeholders was $12,000. These inconsistencies are irreconcilable and render the verdict perverse and inconsistent. Ayer v. Chicago, M. St. P. P. R. Co. 187 Minn. 169, 244 N.W. 681. Accordingly, under Rule 49.02, a new trial must be granted. 3. The state contends that the trial court erred in receiving in evidence expert testimony as to valuations which admittedly were based upon improvements to the premises then in contemplation but not actually completed at the time of the trial; and in receiving in evidence on the issue of valuation exhibits indicating the increase in lessee's gross sales during its occupancy of the premises.

  5. McMillen v. Meyer

    74 N.W.2d 393 (Minn. 1956)   Cited 10 times
    In McMillen, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that a memorandum which is not made a part of the order or findings to which it is attached can only be referred to in order to clarify a part of the order when the order is ambiguous.

    In essence we have an absolute finding that plaintiff-husband was contributorily negligent and with respect to this finding there is no inconsistency between the two verdicts. For examples of truly perverse verdicts, see Ayer v. Chicago, M. St. P. P. R. Co. 187 Minn. 169, 244 N.W. 681; Tiedje v. Haney, 184 Minn. 569, 239 N.W. 611; Begin v. Liederbach Bus Co. Inc. 167 Minn. 84, 208 N.W. 546. In each of these cases suit was brought against a corporation and also against its employer-agent upon whose negligent acts was predicated the asserted liability of the corporation.

  6. R. L. Turner Motors v. Hilkey

    260 Ala. 577 (Ala. 1954)   Cited 14 times
    In R. L. Turner Motors v. Hilkey, 260 Ala. 577, 72 So.2d 75, Hilkey had filed three separate suits against R. L. Turner Motors, a partnership composed of R. L. Turner, Anna L. Turner, and C. M. Jacobs individually.

    However, where a master and servant are sued jointly, a verdict against the master only is in effect a verdict for the servant. 57 C.J.S., Master and Servant, ยง 619, p. 423; Begin v. Liederbach Bus Co., 167 Minn. 84, 208 N.W. 546; Ayer v. Chicago, M., St. P. P. R. Co., 187 Minn. 169, 244 N.W. 681. See Sibley v. Odum, 257 Ala. 292, 58 So.2d 896; Richardson v. Stinson, 211 Ala. 254, 100 So. 209; Handley, Reeves Co. v. Lawley Co., 90 Ala. 527, 8 So. 101.

  7. Nicholas v. Hennepin Wheel Goods Co.

    58 N.W.2d 572 (Minn. 1953)   Cited 6 times

    To return a verdict against the corporation, based on Gifis's negligence, without returning a verdict against Gifis would render the verdict perverse. Bell v. N. P. Ry. Co. 112 Minn. 488, 128 N.W. 829; Begin v. Liederbach Bus Co. Inc. 167 Minn. 84, 208 N.W. 546; Tiedje v. Haney, 184 Minn. 569, 239 N.W. 611; Ayer v. C. M. St. P. P. R. Co. 187 Minn. 169, 244 N.W. 681. In the absence of a verdict against Gifis, in order to support the verdict of the jury the record must disclose negligent conduct on the part of someone and, furthermore, it must disclose that that someone was, at the time of the accident, the servant of the Hennepin Wheel Goods Company so as to impose vicarious liability on the company for that negligence. Under the evidence, that someone would have to be Ranum. Although there was the other unidentified employee of the Hennepin Wheel Goods Company in the basement, the evidence is so vague as to his conduct that any finding of negligence on his part could not be sustained.

  8. Cox v. Dakota Cnty.

    A15-0009 (Minn. Ct. App. Sep. 8, 2015)   Cited 1 times
    Finding no evidence in the record of intent on the part of any unnamed employees to support jury's verdict of vicarious liability for false imprisonment against the county

    Id. An internally inconsistent verdict is perverse and cannot stand. See Ayer v. Chicago, M., St. P. & P. R.R. Co., 187 Minn. 169, 172, 244 N.W. 681, 682 (1932) (granting railroad company new trial after jury verdict finding railroad company liable but railroad employee alleged to be negligent not liable). The district court granted JMOL to the county, concluding that there was no evidentiary basis for holding the county vicariously liable for false imprisonment.