Winona & St. Peter Land Co. v. Ebilcisor
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiff, the Winona and St. Peter Land Company, from an order of the District Court óf Brown County, Webber, J., made December IS, 1891, refusing its motion for a new trial. On May 17, 1864, Hiram W. Locke settled upon and entered at the local U. S. Land Office as a homestead (U. S. R. S. § 2289) the ■east half of the northeast quarter of section twenty-five, (25,) T. 109, R. 33, in Brown county.
Read the full summary
Appeal by plaintiff, the Winona and St. Peter Land Company, from an order of the District Court óf Brown County, Webber, J., made December IS, 1891, refusing its motion for a new trial. On May 17, 1864, Hiram W. Locke settled upon and entered at the local U. S. Land Office as a homestead (U. S. R. S. § 2289) the ■east half of the northeast quarter of section twenty-five, (25,) T. 109, R. 33, in Brown county. He occupied the land as his homestead until June 7, 1867, when he left it and the entry was cancelled by the Commissioner of the General Land Office. On July 2, 1871, the defendant,…
1Opinion of the CourtDickinson, J.
This is an action of ejectment. It was tried by the court without a jury, and upon the facts found it was considered that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover. Attention should be •directed to the following facts found by the court:
The plaintiff’s asserted title is derived through (1) the act of congress of March 3, 1857, making a grant of lands to the territory of Minnesota to aid in the construction of certain lines of railroad, including that of the present Winona & St. Peter Railroad Company; (2) the definite location of the line of that road, August 3, 1864, by •the filing of its…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Smelting Co. v. KempSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Johnson v. TowsleySupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- Moore v. RobbinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Wright v. RoseberrySupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Newhall v. SangerSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co. v. OlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
- Johnson v. DrewSupreme Court of Florida · 1894
- O'Connor v. GertgensSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902