Twitchell v. Nelson
| Decision Date | 17 July 1914 |
| Docket Number | 18,612 - (149) |
| Parties | CLARA S. TWITCHELL v. LEONARD NELSON and Others |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Action in the district court for Hennepin county against Leonard Nelson, James F. Cummings and the Glenwood-Inglewood Co. to recover $25,000. The case was tried before Jelley, J., who directed a verdict in favor of defendants pursuant to a stipulation between the parties in open court. From an order denying a motion for a new trial, plaintiff appealed. Reversed.
Tort -- interference with another's contract -- evidence.
1. The wrongful interference with the contracts of others, causing the breach of a contract, is a tort; and in this case it is held that the evidence is sufficient to justify a finding of the jury that the defendants appearing in this appeal committed a tort in interfering with and causing a breach of a contract between the plaintiff and one of the defendants.
Damages.
2. The evidence was sufficient to justify a verdict for more than nominal damages.
September 10, 1914.
Taxation of costs.
3. When the prevailing party on an appeal serves the clerk with notice of taxation of costs and disbursements within 20 days after notice of the filing of the opinion, his right to tax the same after such 20 days is preserved, and the other party is not entitled to enter judgment without costs and disbursements under rule XXV. [Reporter.]
Arthur W. Selover, for appellant.
A. E Helmick and McDowell & Fosseen, for respondents.
This is an action brought by the plaintiff to recover of the defendants damages for a wrongful interference with her contract rights. There was a verdict directed for the defendants and the plaintiff appeals from the order denying her motion for a new trial.
1. The wrongful interference with the contract relations of others, causing a breach, is a tort. Mealey v. Bemidji Lumber Co. 118 Minn. 427, 136 N.W. 1090; Joyce v. Great Northern Ry. Co. 100 Minn. 225, 110 N.W. 975, 8 L.R.A. 756; Faunce v. Searles, 122 Minn. 343, 142 N.W. 816, and cases cited.
The plaintiff leased to the defendant Cummings a lot in Cedar Lake Park in Hennepin county, reserving a certain portion of it, with the right in the lessee to remove the sand at a specified price per cubic yard. It gave Cummings no further rights in the property. It was construed in Twitchell v Cummings, 123 Minn. 270, 143 N.W. 785. Afterwards the plaintiff leased to the defendant Anderson and one Nelson a portion of the sand lot, being the portion reserved, for the purpose of carrying on the business of selling spring water under the name of the Minneapolis Spring Water Co., a name assumed by the plaintiff and her associates, her husband and her son, in the business which they had been conducting. This lease contemplated that the lessees should carry on the business which the Twitchells had established, taking their customers, and should endeavor to increase it and should return the property and the business at the termination of the lease. Trouble arose. Cummings, claiming under his lease, gave Nelson and Anderson notice that the spring was his property and directed them not to pay rent to the plaintiff. It is clear beyond any question that Cummings had no right to the spring. He knew...
To continue reading
Request your trial