Seymour v. State
Wisconsin Supreme Court
EEEOE to the Circuit Court for Kenosha County. The action below was brought by the State on the complaint of the supervisors of the town of Pleasant Prairie, against Seymour, for obstructing a highway running along the south line of the S. E. qr. of sec. 26, T. 1 in said county. Answer, that the locus in quo was land belonging to Seymour, and not highway.
Read the full summary
EEEOE to the Circuit Court for Kenosha County. The action below was brought by the State on the complaint of the supervisors of the town of Pleasant Prairie, against Seymour, for obstructing a highway running along the south line of the S. E. qr. of sec. 26, T. 1 in said county. Answer, that the locus in quo was land belonging to Seymour, and not highway. On the trial, evidence was introduced by the state to show that a road four rods in width had been duly laid out on each side of the south line of said quarter section, in March, 1863, and that the same had been obstructed by the defendant…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Downer, J.
Without the consent of the owners. no road can be laid through any orchard or gardens, set *242out, or cultivated two years or more. R. S., ch. 19, sec. 54. The circuit court instructed the jury, “ that the line of the road might be laid up to the line of the trees in the orchard, and so it might be laid up to the tilled or cultivated portion of the garden, and take the whole of the uncultivated part between the cultivated earth and the garden fence.” This instruction was based upon testimony, in substance, that the road laid out would come up to the first row of fruit…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Smart v. HartWisconsin Supreme Court · 1890
- Emrich v. IrelandMississippi Supreme Court · 1877
- Mueller v. BrotzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1919