Marek v. Jelinek
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Le Sueur county to recover posses*sion of a strip of land described in the complaint and the sum of $100 damages for the withholding thereof.
Read the full summary
Action in the district court for Le Sueur county to recover posses*sion of a strip of land described in the complaint and the sum of $100 damages for the withholding thereof. The answer alleged that the correct boundary line between the lands owned by plaintiff and defendant, as established by the government survey, was well-known and marked upon the ground, and denied that defendant attempted! to take possession or was occupying any land not within the true-' boundary of defendant’s land as shown by the government survey.. The ease was tried before Morrison, J., who, at the close of the…
1Opinion of the CourtHallam, J.
This case involves a disputed boundary. The land in controversy is a strip 900 feet long, 6 feet wide at one end and 18 feet wide at the other, about one quarter of an acre in all. These parties together *470own the east half of the west half of a section. Plaintiff owns lot 2, or the east one half of the northwest quarter, and defendant owns the east half of the southwest quarter. There appears to be no question that the line claimed by defendant-respondent as the boundary between them is the correct line between these government subdivisions.
The trouble arose as follows:
In 1888 the owners of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Beardsley v. CraneSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Benz v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
- Ohlson v. ManderfeldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1881
3Cited by10 opinions
- Romanchuk v. PlotkinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
- Engquist v. WirtjesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
- Fishman v. NielsenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1952
- Bjerketvedt v. JacobsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
- Roy v. DannehrSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.