Bruggerman v. True
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Ramsey county, Brill, J., presiding, refusing a new trial.
1Opinion of the CourtBerry, J.
The plaintiff, claiming to be owner in possession of certain land, brings this action against the defendants for unlawfully entering upon the same, digging up the soil, etc. The defence is, that the alleged unlawful acts were done under the authority of the proper town supervisors, in and about the working of a highway, which had been duly and legally laid out, and directed to be opened and worked, at the locus in quo.
The proceedings for laying out the highway were had in 1870, under the provisions of Gen. St. c. 13, §§ 33-13, as amended by Laws 1867, c. 30, § é, and Laws 1868, c. 18, § 2. By…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Ames v. Lake Superior & Mississippi RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1875
- Langford v. County CommissionersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1871
- Selby v. StanleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1860
- Cassidy v. SmithSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1868
3Cited by14 opinions
- State ex rel. Clapp v. Minnesota Thresher Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Hawley v. WallaceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
- State ex rel. Hunt v. City of MontevideoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
- State v. MessengerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1880
- Peters v. City of DuluthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1912
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.