Legal Opinion

Soukup v. Topka

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 29, 1893PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Appeal by plaintiff, Frank Soukup, from a judgment of the District Court of Scott County, P. E. Brown, J., entered November 1, 1892, awarding to defendant,. Thomas Topka, the real estate in dispute. Wenzel Drazda owned a saloon and dancing hall forty feet wide by one hundred and one feet’ deep, fronting south onto Main Street in New Prague, Scott County.

Read the full summary

Appeal by plaintiff, Frank Soukup, from a judgment of the District Court of Scott County, P. E. Brown, J., entered November 1, 1892, awarding to defendant,. Thomas Topka, the real estate in dispute. Wenzel Drazda owned a saloon and dancing hall forty feet wide by one hundred and one feet’ deep, fronting south onto Main Street in New Prague, Scott County. He bought on March 27, 1877, of Edson E. Smith and Harriet C. Snow, a piece of land forty feet wide by eighty-two feet deep adjoining his saloon in the rear to the north, and a piece of land on the east of both, twelve feet wide and one…

1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.

Plaintiff’s sixth assignment of error is unavailing both because it is too general and indefinite, and also because there were no exceptions to the rulings complained of.

The only point raised by the other assignments of error is that the conclusions of law are not justified by the findings of fact.

Upon the findings, which are all we can consider, the only question is the construction of the deed from Smith and Snow to defendant’s grantor, Drazda.

This deed, for the consideration of $400, conveys, first, a tract of land 82 feet long, from north to south, by 40 feet wide, from east to west, and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Farnham v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
  2. Vail v. . Long Island R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1887
  3. Robinson v. Missisquoi R. R.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1887
  4. Flaten v. MoorheadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
  5. Sanborn v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Parks v. GatesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Sherman v. ShermanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Overton v. MoseleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1902
  4. Kronschnabel v. City of Saint PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1965
  5. Chambers v. Great Northern Power Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1907

5 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