Legal Opinion

Huhn v. Ryan

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 28, 1940No. 32,404PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Holt, Justice.

Action for declaratory judgment. Trial to the court. Plaintiffs’ motion for amended conclusions of law or a new trial was denied, and they appeal.

The facts may be summarized thus: In the fall of 1903

Philip C. Justus was the owner of two lots in the city of St. Paul fronting north on Dayton avenue. The rear of the lots abutted lots owned by Carl P. Waldon fronting south on Selby avenue. Justus’s lots were numbered 7 and 8. Both owners, then about to erect apartments upon their proper ty, agreed to join in installing a heating plant for the buildings and in employing an engineer…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Lampman v. . MilksNew York Court of Appeals · 1860

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Romanchuk v. PlotkinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
  2. Kleis v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
  3. Werner v. SampleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1961
  4. Levine v. Twin City Red Barn No. 2, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1973
  5. Quist v. FullerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974

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

Powered by the Exa API