The case involved a workers' compensation claim by the widow of Henry Peterson, a 63-year-old employee of The Ruberoid Company who died from coronary thrombosis after performing physically demanding tasks unloading slate granules from hopper railroad cars on January 7, 1959. The Industrial Commission found that Peterson's death resulted from an injury arising out of and in the course of his employment and awarded benefits. On review, the Minnesota Supreme Court affirmed, holding that under the applicable statute it was unnecessary to prove unusual exertion, but the claimant must show a causal link between the employment activities and the heart attack; here, evidence of Peterson's work movements that day, combined with supporting medical expert testimony, reasonably supported the commission's findings of causation. The court noted that conflicts in the evidence, including differing expert opinions, are resolved by the commission and will be upheld if supported by the record.
The case involved a defendant indicted for first-degree murder after he entered a home and fatally assaulted an 11-year-old girl and other children with a revolver, leading to his conviction by jury for third-degree murder and a prison sentence. On appeal, the defendant, appearing pro se, raised multiple claims of error, including that jury instructions after prolonged deliberations were coercive and that a key child witness was incompetent. The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the evidence of guilt was overwhelming, the trial was fair with competent representation, the challenged instructions aligned with prior precedent, and no prejudicial errors occurred.
This case involves an appeal from the denial of a habeas corpus petition filed by a defendant who had pleaded guilty to sodomy in 1956 and received an indeterminate prison sentence. The petitioner alleged due process violations, including a coerced statement by police, delayed appearance before a magistrate without counsel, inadequate legal representation, and failure by counsel to raise a valid defense. The court affirmed the denial, holding that the petition failed to allege sufficient facts to establish a prima facie case for relief and consisted mainly of unsupported legal conclusions. Review of the record showed the defendant appeared with chosen counsel, freely admitted the offense without claiming coercion, and received proper sentencing after counsel sought clemency and psychiatric help.
The case involved a habeas corpus petition by relator White challenging his imprisonment under a 1956 conviction for unauthorized use of an automobile, enhanced by prior felony convictions, on grounds of inadequate legal representation and violation of Minnesota's sentencing statute for multiple offenses (Minn. St. 610.33). The district court discharged the writ, and the Minnesota Supreme Court affirmed that decision. The court reasoned that White had consulted with his public defender before pleading guilty, understood the proceedings based on his criminal history, and received sound advice regarding probation, making claims of inadequate counsel unsupported. It further held that the sentencing statute did not apply because the convictions were not for multiple offenses before any sentence was pronounced. Other challenges were deemed improper for habeas review and without merit, confirming the trial court's jurisdiction.
The case concerned Newton G. Hahne's application to the Minnesota Railroad and Warehouse Commission for a certificate of convenience and necessity to haul petroleum products from a new Duluth terminal to the same Iron Range destinations he had previously served from the Wrenshall terminal under his existing authority. After a hearing, the Commission granted the certificate, finding that Hahne would otherwise lose most of his business, that his customers would be adversely affected, and that public convenience and necessity supported the grant; the district court affirmed. Competing carriers appealed, arguing that the eight carriers already authorized to serve the new terminal could meet all demand in the area. The Supreme Court reversed, concluding that the record lacked sufficient evidence to establish public convenience and necessity because testimony showed other carriers could handle the shipments and the service was not necessary for the affected companies or the public.
This case involved a wrongful death lawsuit brought by the father of William Rosenthal against Hill Top Riding Academy and its employee Frank Newman. The decedent died from injuries sustained when his motor scooter collided with a rented horse on a county road at dusk in 1958. The trial court directed a verdict for the defendants, but the Minnesota Supreme Court reversed that ruling and ordered a new trial. The court held that the evidence could support a jury finding of negligence because the academy allowed an inexperienced rider on a nervous horse along a busy road after dark, in violation of its own safety rules, and the guide failed to adequately control the situation despite complaints from the rider.