Legal Opinion

Lehner v. Kozlowski

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1944PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.

To overcome a serious state of affairs due to the presence of surface waters and a rather extensive marsh, the appellant shortly after purchasing a farm, originated a plan for draining his land and to some extent benefiting the respondent’s land. In carrying out this plan, he succeeded in getting the easement set forth in the statement of facts. His right to the relief he now seeks depends entirely upon the scope and meaning of this 1913 agreement.

The condition that existed when appellant became owner had its source in the- natural surroundings. The appellant testified that “before the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Hoyt v. City of HudsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1871
  2. Winslow v. City of VallejoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
  3. Laden v. AtkesonMontana Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Ritchey v. WelshIndiana Supreme Court · 1898
  5. Eulrich v. RichterWisconsin Supreme Court · 1875

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. AKG REAL ESTATE, LLC v. KostermanWisconsin Supreme Court · 2006
  2. Wisconsin Public Service Corp. v. AndrewsCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2009
  3. AKG REAL ESTATE, LLC v. KostermanWisconsin Supreme Court · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API