Legal Opinion

State Trust Co. of New York v. City of Duluth

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota

Decided November 8, 1900No. 333PublishedCited by 4 opinions

On Motion by Defendant for Judgment after Plaintiff bad Bested Its Case. '

1Opinion of the CourtLochben, District Judge

(orally). I am inclined to think that the plaintiff cannot recover. The ordinance constitutes a contract between the parties, and requires that the water company shall sluice the gutters without charge. The purpose is to cleanse the gutters, and gather and discharge therefrom whatever offensive matter may be deposited on the streets, or come through drains from the adjoining houses, stores, and establishments, which would make the gutters, unless washed out and cleansed, dangerous to the public health and offensive to sight and smell. It is not simply the rainfall running in the gutters in a…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. United States v. MarrinDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1909
  2. City of South St. Paul v. Northern States Power Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1933
  3. Western Electric Co. v. City of JamestownNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1921
  4. Ponce & Guayama Railroad v. American RailroadDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico · 1914

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

Powered by the Exa API