Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Hull v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co., 133 N.W. 852.

26 citing documents.

Vadnais v. American Family Mutual Insurance 243 N.W.2d 45 Minn. 1976
Vadnais v. American Family Mutual Insurance 243 N.W.2d 45 Minn. 1976
Co. 116 Minn. 349, 356 , : “The rule of Hicks v. Stone was designed to include only those cases where the trial court for reasons peculiarly within its knowledge is justified in concluding that the ends of justice will be best served by submitting the evidence to another jury.
Koenig v. Ludowese 243 N.W.2d 29 Minn. 1976
Koenig v. Ludowese 243 N.W.2d 29 Minn. 1976
Co. 116 Minn. 349, 356 , we said: “The rule of Hicks v. Stone was designed to include only those cases where the trial court for reasons peculiarly within its knowledge is justified in concluding that the ends of justice will be best served by submitting the evidence to another jury.
Benson v. Northland Transportation Co. 274 N.W. 532 Minn. 1937
Benson v. Northland Transportation Co. 274 N.W. 532 Minn. 1937
Co. 116 Minn. 349 , ; McDonnell v. St.
Potter v. Great Northern Railway Co. 208 N.W. 641 Minn. 1926
Potter v. Great Northern Railway Co. 208 N.W. 641 Minn. 1926
Co. 116 Minn. 349 , , wherein it was said: “Such a conclusion may be founded in a doubt as to the credibility of the witnesses, a doubt as to the probative force and character of the evidence, or a feeling gained from the course and manner of the trial, and the atmosphere thereof which is incapable of being spread upon th
Fullerton v. Chicago Great Western Railroad 199 N.W. 93 Minn. 1924
Fullerton v. Chicago Great Western Railroad 199 N.W. 93 Minn. 1924
Co., 116 Minn. 349 , ; Street v. Chicago, M. & St.
McDonnell v. St. Paul Union Depot Co. 195 N.W. 538 Minn. 1923
McDonnell v. St. Paul Union Depot Co. 195 N.W. 538 Minn. 1923
Co. 116 Minn. 349, 353 , ; 10 C. J. § 1341.
Rauscher v. Great Northern Railway Co. 188 N.W. 1017 Minn. 1922
Rauscher v. Great Northern Railway Co. 188 N.W. 1017 Minn. 1922
Co. 116 Minn. 349 , ; Street v. Chicago, M. & St.
Joseph v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad 160 N.W. 689 Minn. 1916
Joseph v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad 160 N.W. 689 Minn. 1916
Co. 116 Minn. 349 , Street v. Chicago, M. & St.
Street v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. 145 N.W. 746 Minn. 1914
Street v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. 145 N.W. 746 Minn. 1914
Co. 116 Minn. 349, 355 , ; Butler v. St.
Shields v. Minneapolis, St. Paul, Rochester & Dubuque Electric Traction Co. 144 N.W. 1092 Minn. 1914
Shields v. Minneapolis, St. Paul, Rochester & Dubuque Electric Traction Co. 144 N.W. 1092 Minn. 1914
Weiss v. Peterson 144 N.W. 450 Minn. 1913
Weiss v. Peterson 144 N.W. 450 Minn. 1913
Co. 116 Minn. 349, 356 , .
Buck v. Buck 142 N.W. 729 Minn. 1913
Buck v. Buck 142 N.W. 729 Minn. 1913
Co. 116 Minn. 349, 356 , .
Dorffi v. Duluth, Winnipeg & Pacific Railroad 135 N.W. 529 Minn. 1912
Dorffi v. Duluth, Winnipeg & Pacific Railroad 135 N.W. 529 Minn. 1912
Co. 116 Minn. 349 , , is relied upon in support of the claim.