Davis & Barnes v. Murphy
Supreme Court of Minnesota
This was an appeal from an order of the District Court of Scott County. A. G. Chatfield, Judge. The following is a statement of the facts as they appear from the record in the case: Prior to the 28th day of April, A. D. 1853, Holmes & Fuller had entered upon and into the possession of certain lands in Scott County in this State, and laid off the same into lots, blocks, streets and alleys, made and filed a plat of said lands under the name of “Shakopee City,” and were at that…
Read the full summary
This was an appeal from an order of the District Court of Scott County. A. G. Chatfield, Judge. The following is a statement of the facts as they appear from the record in the case: Prior to the 28th day of April, A. D. 1853, Holmes & Fuller had entered upon and into the possession of certain lands in Scott County in this State, and laid off the same into lots, blocks, streets and alleys, made and filed a plat of said lands under the name of “Shakopee City,” and were at that time occupying and improving said lands as a town site, the title to the same being in the United States Government. On…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Qow't
— Flanurau, J.
This is an appeal from the decision of Hon. A. G. Chatfield, acting as Trustee under the act of Congress of May 23, 1844, in relation to town sites, and the acts of the Legislature of Minnesota passed in pursuance thereof. The contest was about block No. 74 in the town of Sliakopee, in Scott county; and the only facts disclosed by the evidence are, that Holmes & Fuller were the original proprietors of the town; that they conveyed the block in dispute first to II. H. Spencer on the 28th of April, 1853, which deed was not recorded until the 2d of March, 1854; that…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Harrington v. St. Paul & Sioux City RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1871
- Coy v. CoySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1870