Legal Opinion

Holmgren v. Bondhus

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided November 19, 1976No. 45965PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Considered and decided by the court without oral argument.

2Per curiam

Respondents, Frank E. and Thelma G. Holmgren, have brought this action against appellant, Tom Bondhus, for damages and to enjoin a trespass by appellant, whose property abuts that of respondents on Big Lake in Sherburne County. Bondhus appeals from a decision of the district court fixing the boundary between his property and respondents’ property. The Holmgrens seek review of the damages they were awarded. We affirm.

The property which is the subject of this dispute is in the city of Big Lake and is bounded by Idaho Avenue on the north,…

3Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Nattin v. GlassellSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1924
  2. Hruby v. LonsethWashington Supreme Court · 1911
  3. Mechler v. DehnAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
  4. Sorensen v. MosbacherSupreme Court of Iowa · 1930

4Cited by2 opinions

  1. Condos v. TrappWyoming Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Condos v. TrappWyoming Supreme Court · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API