Harrsch v. Breilien

4 Citing cases

  1. Pettit v. Lifson

    57 N.W.2d 34 (Minn. 1953)   Cited 6 times
    Concluding traffic statute requiring that vehicles be driven on right half of roadway applied to alleys as well as streets and highways

    Such evidence would amply sustain a finding that, had the truck been traveling down the right half of the alley, as the statute directed, it would not have struck Allen, and that defendants' violation of § 169.18, subd. 1, therefore, was the proximate cause of the accident. Kulla v. E. B. Crabtree Co. 203 Minn. 105, 280 N.W. 16; Oxborough v. Murphy Transfer Storage Co. 194 Minn. 335, 260 N.W. 305; Peterson v. Miller, 182 Minn. 532, 235 N.W. 15; Harrsch v. Breilien, 181 Minn. 400, 232 N.W. 710. See, Hinman v. Gould, 205 Minn. 377, 286 N.W. 364. Cf. Barrett v. Nash Finch Co. 228 Minn. 156, 36 N.W.2d 526. 2. It is defendants' contention that, since Allen was not using a regular crosswalk, the duty rested upon him to yield the right of way to defendants' truck (§ 169.21, subd. 3) and that his failure in this respect established his contributory negligence as a matter of law.

  2. Barrett v. Nash Finch Co.

    228 Minn. 156 (Minn. 1949)   Cited 19 times
    In Barrett v. Nash Finch Co., supra, 228 Minn. 156, 36 N.W.2d 526, which arose out of a collision of a moving truck with a standing car, it was held that the truck driver, who saw the car — which was on the wrong side of the road and was without lights — in time to avoid the collision, but who negligently failed to do so, was guilty of negligence which was the sole proximate cause of the accident.

    It logically follows that, in order to constitute actionable negligence or contributory negligence as a defense, the violation of statute upon which the claim of negligence is predicated must, the same as negligence independent of statute, be the proximate cause of the harm for which recovery is sought. Olson v. Hector Const. Co. Inc. 216 Minn. 432, 13 N.W.2d 35; Erickson v. Morrow, 206 Minn. 58, 287 N.W. 628; Krinke v. Gramer, 187 Minn. 595, 246 N.W. 376; Harrsch v. Breilien, 181 Minn. 400, 232 N.W. 710. If Barrett's alleged violations of statute were not the proximate cause of the collision causing his death, they are of no consequence. 3.

  3. Martin v. Tracy

    246 N.W. 6 (Minn. 1932)   Cited 12 times

    His special damages were $1,500 or more. See Harrsch v. Breilien, 181 Minn. 400, 232 N.W. 710; 2 Dunnell, Minn. Dig. (2 ed. Supp.) §§ 2596-2597. 7. The court permitted the plaintiff to recover for lost time.

  4. Olson v. Purity Baking Co.

    242 N.W. 283 (Minn. 1932)   Cited 21 times

    The full movement of the knee joint has not been restored. The burns are likely to continue to give pain and discomfort. Compared with such cases as Tuttle v. Wicklund, 178 Minn. 353, 227 N.W. 203, and Harrsch v. Breilien, 181 Minn. 400, 232 N.W. 710, the damages awarded must be considered modest. The order should be and is affirmed.