Legal Opinion
O'Leary v. Wangensteen
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided October 12, 1928No. 26,794PublishedCited by 77 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWilson, C. J.
Defendant appealed from an order denying bis alternative motion for judgment non obstante or a new trial. Tbe action was to recover tbe value of plaintiff’s dog which defendant killed while it was chasing his turkeys.
Dogs may be killed when menacing sheep, G-. S. 1923, § 7286, or when they constitute a nuisance within G. S. 1923, § 7287. The two statutes created two situations in which dogs might be killed. Oldenburg v. Petersdorff, 160 Minn. 402, 200 N. W. 446. The scope of § 7286 was enlarged by L. 1927, p. 311, c. 217, 2 Mason Minn. St. § 7286. It now includes all live stock and poultry…
2Cases cited55 opinions
- Babich v. Oliver Iron Mining Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
- Olsson v. Midland InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
- Hawkins v. SaubySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
- Jensen v. FischerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
- Klare v. PetersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by77 opinions
- Mattfeld v. NesterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1948
- Frey v. Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Moeller v. St. Paul City Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
- Manley v. Harvey Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
- Knuth v. MurphySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1952
72 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.