Eastland v. Fogo
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Richland County. Action of trespass quare clausum. The defendants alleged, among other things, that the premises described in the complaint were a public highway. Other facts are stated in the opinion. There was a verdict for the defendants, and from the judgment entered thereon the plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtOrton, J.
The locus in quo is a strip of land lying north of and adjoining Hazeltine’s platted addition to the village of Richland Center, not included in such plat, or marked *275thereon as a street or other public ground. The plat and certificate were in evidence for the purpose of showing a dedication thereby of this strip by Hazeltine, the then owner. First. The circuit judge instructed the jury that “ the records of the plats introduced are construed by me to intend a dedication of the piece of land between the north side of block forty-two and the section line, including the place of the alleged…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Gardiner v. TisdaleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1853
- Mericle v. MulksWisconsin Supreme Court · 1853
3Cited by4 opinions
- Bartlett v. Eau Claire CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
- Hurley v. Mississippi & Rum River Boom Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
- Ayers v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1894
- Eastland v. FogoWisconsin Supreme Court · 1886