Jordan v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the district court for Clay county, Mills, J., presiding.
1Opinion of the CourtGtleillan, C. J.
From the course of the trial in this case, as shown by the settled statement of the case, it is apparent that the parties did not by consent enter upon the trial of any other than the issues made by the pleadings. This makes it necessary to refer to the complaint to ascertain what issues it presents; that is, what act of the defendant it alleges as wrongful. It alleges that the defendant wrongfully, unlawfully, wantonly, negligently, and maliciously cut, dug, and made, and caused to be dug, cut, and made, two certain large ditches about six miles in length, one on each side of its roadbed,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- O'Brien v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1878
- Henderson v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
- Pye v. City of MankatoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Lee v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1875
- Kobs v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1875
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Sheehan v. FlynnSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894
- Shaw v. WardWisconsin Supreme Court · 1907
- Carroll v. Township of RyeNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1904
- Brown v. Winona & Southwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Johnson v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1891
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.