Sherwood v. St. Paul & Chicago Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court for Winona county.
1Opinion of the CourtBerry, J.
In a case of this kind, the statute provides-that the respondents shall be styled plaintiffs, the appellant defendant. Laws 1857, Ex. Sess., ch. 1, § 13. The casein the district court was an appeal from an award of commissioners for- the appropriation of plaintiffs’ land for the purposes of defendant’s railway.
1. It appeared that the strip of land appropriated by defendant was part of a larger tract, -as to which the plaintiffs’ theory was that it was one compact tract, used and occupied as an entirety, as a site for a brick-yard. This theory the evidence introduced by the plaintiffs tended…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Clark v. . BairdNew York Court of Appeals · 1853
- Swan v. County of MiddlesexMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- Curtis v. St. Paul, Stillwater & Taylor's Falls RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1873
- Winona & St. Peter R. R. v. WaldronSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1866
- Lehmicke v. St. Paul, Stillwater & Taylor's Falls RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1873
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Coward v. ClantonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Illinois Central Railroad v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1897
- Union Elevator Co. v. Kansas City Suburban Belt RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1896
- State v. RadosevichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
- Underwood v. Town Board of EmpireSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.