Donohoo v. Murray
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEA.L from the Circuit Oourt for Grant County. Action of trespass quare olausum. The answer admits the doing of the acts complained of but alleges that the locus in quo was a “ street or public highway, or ground over which defendant has an easement or right of way,” etc. The facts will sufficiently appear from the opinion. There was a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtObtof, J.
In 1874 the respondent employed a surveyor, and laid out a plat of the village of St. Rose on land he owned, and had an unfinished paper plat made of the same. In 1875 he sold and deeded to the appellant lot 1, so marked on said plat, by metes and bounds, of 126 feet long and 60-J-feet wide, in square form. On the plat there is a highway on the east side of said lot, and a street on the north side, making the lot a corner lot, and the respondent, about that time, sold to one Oonlon a lot of 132 feet square, north of said street, and he opened the street between said lots, and it' was jointly…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Bissell v. . the New York Central R.R. CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1861
- Tallmadge v. . the East River BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
- Fox v. Union Sugar RefineryMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
- Gardiner v. TisdaleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1853
- Kimball v. City of KenoshaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1856
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Tilly v. Mitchell & Lewis Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
- Rahr v. WittmannWisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
- Mahler v. BrumderWisconsin Supreme Court · 1896
- Smith v. City of BeloitWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
- Andrews v. YoumansWisconsin Supreme Court · 1890
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.