City of St. Paul v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from an order of tbe district court for Ramsey county, Kelly and Otis, JJ., denying a motion for a new trial. Mr. Hill was without authority to execute the petition on behalf of the railway company. It was incumbent on plaintiff to show that, in signing the petition, he acted under authority from the company, or that the company, while still in possession .of its interest as an adverse claimant, ratified his act with full knowledge of all the facts.
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendant from an order of tbe district court for Ramsey county, Kelly and Otis, JJ., denying a motion for a new trial. Mr. Hill was without authority to execute the petition on behalf of the railway company. It was incumbent on plaintiff to show that, in signing the petition, he acted under authority from the company, or that the company, while still in possession .of its interest as an adverse claimant, ratified his act with full knowledge of all the facts. James v. Indianapolis & St. L. E. Co., 91 111. 554; City of St. Paul v. Chicago, M. & St. P. E. Co., 45 Minn. 387, 394, 48 N.…
1Opinion of the Court
. MITCHELL, J.
This appeal has once before been considered by this court. The record and briefs were very voluminous, and the main issue was whether the defendant had acquired absolute title to the premises in controversy by adverse possession. The oral arguments were wholly, and the briefs mainly, devoted to a discussion of that question. The natural result was that other and less important issues received but little attention from either court or counsel.
The defendant’s claim of certain rights under City Ordinance No. 286 was disposed of in our opinion by merely saying that the ordinance…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- St. Louis v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
- City of St. Louis v. Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1888
- Lackland v. North Missouri RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1860
- Gregsten v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1893
- Portland & Willamette Valley R. R. v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1886
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Cabell v. City of Cottage GroveOregon Supreme Court · 1942
- Town of Winchester v. CoxSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1942
- Northwestern Telephone Exchange Co. v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
- Codman v. CrockerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- State v. KorrerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.