Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Shea v. St. Paul City Ry. Co., 52 N.W. 902.

40 citing documents.

Bradley v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 201 N.W. 606 Minn. 1924
Bradley v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 201 N.W. 606 Minn. 1924
Hughes v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 178 N.W. 605 Minn. 1920
Hughes v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 178 N.W. 605 Minn. 1920
Co. 50 Minn. 395 , ; Riley v. Minneapolis Street Ry.
Syck v. Duluth Street Railway Co. 177 N.W. 944 Minn. 1920
Syck v. Duluth Street Railway Co. 177 N.W. 944 Minn. 1920
Co. 50 Minn. 395 , ; Bremer v. St.
Curran v. Chicago Great Western Railroad 159 N.W. 955 Minn. 1916
Curran v. Chicago Great Western Railroad 159 N.W. 955 Minn. 1916
Co. 50 Minn. 395 , ; Bremer v. St.
Pickell v. St. Paul City Railway Co. 139 N.W. 616 Minn. 1913
Pickell v. St. Paul City Railway Co. 139 N.W. 616 Minn. 1913
Co. 50 Minn. 395 , ; Bremer v. St.
Langdon v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 138 N.W. 790 Minn. 1912
Langdon v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 138 N.W. 790 Minn. 1912
Co. 50 Minn. 395 , ; Holmgren v. Twin City Rapid Transit Co. 61 Minn. 85 , ; Smith v. Minneapolis Street Ry.
State v. Minneapolis & St. Paul Suburban Railway Co. 130 N.W. 71 Minn. 1911
State v. Minneapolis & St. Paul Suburban Railway Co. 130 N.W. 71 Minn. 1911
Co., 50 Minn. 395 , , it was said: “A street railway company has a mere right to use the street in common with the public generally.
Schanno v. St. Paul City Railway Co. 122 N.W. 783 Minn. 1909
Schanno v. St. Paul City Railway Co. 122 N.W. 783 Minn. 1909
Co., 50 Minn. 395 , ; Watson v. Minneapolis St.
Bremer v. St. Paul City Railway Co. 120 N.W. 382 Minn. 1909
Bremer v. St. Paul City Railway Co. 120 N.W. 382 Minn. 1909
Co., 50 Minn. 395, 399 , ; Holmgren v. Twin City R. T. Co., 61 Minn. 85 , ; Watson v. Minneapolis Street Ry.
Smith v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 104 N.W. 16 Minn. 1905
Smith v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 104 N.W. 16 Minn. 1905
Co., 50 Minn. 395 , ; Watson v. Minneapolis Street Ry.
Peterson v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 95 N.W. 751 Minn. 1903
Peterson v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 95 N.W. 751 Minn. 1903
Russell v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 86 N.W. 346 Minn. 1901
Russell v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 86 N.W. 346 Minn. 1901
Co., 50 Minn. 395 , ; Watson v. Minneapolis St.
Walker v. St. Paul City Railway Co. 84 N.W. 222 Minn. 1900
Walker v. St. Paul City Railway Co. 84 N.W. 222 Minn. 1900
Co., 50 Minn. 395 , , to which we refer; but, in the several cases cited above where recovery was denied, the misfortunes which were held to be remediless occurred in each case where it was apparent that the injured party had no right to suppose that the car would stop, but endeavored, without excuse or being misled by the
Riley v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 83 N.W. 376 Minn. 1900
Riley v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 83 N.W. 376 Minn. 1900
Co., 50 Minn. 395 , ; Boyer v. St.
Wosika v. St. Paul City Railway Co. 83 N.W. 386 Minn. 1900
Wosika v. St. Paul City Railway Co. 83 N.W. 386 Minn. 1900
Co., 50 Minn. 395 , , as the leading authority.
Wilson v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 77 N.W. 238 Minn. 1898
Wilson v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 77 N.W. 238 Minn. 1898
Holmgren v. Twin City Rapid Transit Co. 63 N.W. 270 Minn. 1895
Holmgren v. Twin City Rapid Transit Co. 63 N.W. 270 Minn. 1895
We have stated the reasons for the distinction in Shea v. Saint Paul O. R. Co., 50 Minn. 395 ,, .
Kennedy v. St. Paul City Railway Co. 60 N.W. 810 Minn. 1894
Kennedy v. St. Paul City Railway Co. 60 N.W. 810 Minn. 1894
Co., 50 Minn. 395 , ( ,) and *49 Watson v. Minneapolis Street Ry.
Boyer v. St. Paul City Ry. Co. 55 N.W. 825 Minn. 1893
Boyer v. St. Paul City Ry. Co. 55 N.W. 825 Minn. 1893
Co., 50 Minn. 395 , ( 52 N. W. Rep.
Watson v. Minneapolis Street-Railway Co. 55 N.W. 742 Minn. 1893
Watson v. Minneapolis Street-Railway Co. 55 N.W. 742 Minn. 1893
Co., 50 Minn. 395 , ( 52 N. W. Rep.