Greenman v. Smith

Decision Date01 January 1873
Citation20 Minn. 370
PartiesCHAUNCEY GREENMAN v. JOHN T. SMITH.
CourtMinnesota Supreme Court

Emory Clark, for appellant.

A. D. Perkins, for respondent.

BERRY, J.

In a complaint for assault and battery, it is not necessary, as defendant appears to contend, to allege, in so many words, that the acts complained of were committed "with force," or "with force and arms."

If facts are stated showing "an actual infliction of violence on the person," this is sufficient; for such facts constitute a battery, which includes an assault. 2 Greenl. Ev. § 84.

Defendant's remaining objection to the complaint is equally untenable. The allegation immediately following the statement of the acts of violence complained of, that "thereby said plaintiff was greatly wounded and bruised," etc., is a sufficient averment that plaintiff's injuries were caused by the acts of defendant.

Damages being claimed in this case in the sum of $1,000, this was not an action within the jurisdiction of a justice of the peace. Gen. St. c. 65, § 5, subd. 2. The plaintiff was therefore entitled to his costs and disbursements, notwithstanding he recovered only $50 as damages. Gen. St. c. 67, § 2; Laws 1868, c. 89; Turner v. Holleran, 8 Minn. 451, (Gil. 401.)

Judgment affirmed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
24 cases
  • Kahn v. Traders Insurance Company
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • 1 de dezembro de 1893
    ...Co., supra; Mosness v. Ins. Co., supra; Morley v. Ins. Co., supra; Fox v. Railroad, supra; Hudson v. McCartney, supra; Jonston v. Howard, 20 Minn. 370; Boon v. Ins. Co., 37 Minn. 426; Ins. Co. v. Duke, 43 Ind. 418; Reinig v. Buffalo, 102 N.Y. 308; Selover v. Coe, 63 N.Y. 438; Doyle v. Ins. ......
  • Bush v. Jones
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • 3 de maio de 1906
  • State v. Equitable Sur. Co.
    • United States
    • Minnesota Supreme Court
    • 12 de abril de 1918
    ... ... Nor does the statute fix rules of evidence. [167 N.W. 292]Kerr, Fowler, Schmitt & Furber, of Minneapolis, for appellant.Lyndon A. Smith, Atty. Gen., and James E. Markham, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.HALLAM, J.[1] 1. Chapter 204, Laws 1905 (G. S. 1913, 5258-5302) provides for the ... ...
  • Leu v. Commercial Mutual Fire Insurance Company
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • 26 de fevereiro de 1906
    ... ... it by reasonable modes of arbitration is not invalid under ... section 3925, Rev. Codes 1899. Butler v. Tucker, 24 ... Wend. 447; Smith v. Brady, 17 N.Y. 173; Delaware & Hudson Canal Co. v. Pennsylvania Coal Co., 50 N.Y ... 250; Holmes v. Richet, 56 Cal. 307; Denver & New ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT