Legal Opinion

Eastman v. St. Anthony Falls Water-Power Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided March 14, 1878PublishedCited by 12 opinions

The plaintiffs sought in this action to rescind and annul a ■certain compromise and settlement theretofore entered into by them with the defendant, and also for the abatement and removal of defendant’s dam, whereby the water of the Mississippi river was raised above its natural level opposite the premises of the plaintiffs. The action was brought in the ■district court for Hennepin county.

Read the full summary

The plaintiffs sought in this action to rescind and annul a ■certain compromise and settlement theretofore entered into by them with the defendant, and also for the abatement and removal of defendant’s dam, whereby the water of the Mississippi river was raised above its natural level opposite the premises of the plaintiffs. The action was brought in the ■district court for Hennepin county. The defendant demurred upon the ground that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The court, Vcmderbwrgh, J., presiding, sustained the demurrer, and the plaintiffs…

1Opinion of the CourtLord, J.

The complaint shows that at the date of the agreements hereinafter mentioned plaintiffs were in posses*438sion, and for the present purpose may be considered the owners, of Nicollet Island, (an island in the’Mississipi river, above and near the Falls of St. Anthony,) and that there was then and still is a water-power appurtenant to said island; that defendant owned Hennepin Island, an island in said river below but near Nicollet Island, and had erected a dam across said fiver between its east bank and Hennepin Island,, and up said river to the west of and above the lower end of Nicollet Island,…

2Cited by12 opinions

  1. Cameron, Hull & Co. v. MarvinSupreme Court of Kansas · 1881
  2. Rowe v. Inhabitants of PeabodyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
  3. Frick Co. v. OatsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
  4. James Forrester & Co. v. Kearney National BankNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
  5. Marsh v. WadeWashington Supreme Court · 1889

7 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