Legal Opinion

Curry v. Sandusky Fish Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided February 6, 1903No. Nos. 13,276-(211)PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Beltrami county, McClenaban, J., denying a motion for a new trial.

1Opinion of the CourtLovely, J.

This action is to recover possession of a small tract of land, which has been occupied by the defendant, on the south shore of *486the Lake of the Woods, in Beltrami county, for several years, and for damages for the detention thereof since October 5, 1898.

At the close of the evidence the trial court held as a matter of law that plaintiff was entitled to recover the property in dispute, but submitted the question of damages to the jury. A verdict was returned for plaintiff for $2,450. Defendant moved for a .new trial, which was denied. This appeal is from that order.

It appears from the evidence…

Also in this document: Per curiam.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. McHenry v. NygaardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
  2. Matthews v. O'BrienSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1901

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Propper v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1952
  2. Van Wagoner v. WhitmoreUtah Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Muirhead v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1951
  4. Ford Motor Co. v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
  5. Miles v. JohansonIdaho Supreme Court · 1925

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API