Schultz v. Bower
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Jamison, J., denying a motion for a new trial.
1Opinion of the CourtStart, C. J.
This action is for the recovery of damages sus-. tained by the plaintiff by reason of the defendant’s removal of the lateral support of her soil from the adjacent land. The law of this case, including the measure of damages, was settled by the decision of this court on the former appeal of the case. Schultz v. Bower, 57 Minn. 493, 59 N. W. 631. Upon a new trial of the cause in the district court, the liability of the defendant was con*124ceded, but he insisted that the damages were only nominal. Only the question of damages was litigated, which were assessed by the jury in the sum of $450. The…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Davidson v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
- Schultz v. BowerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894
3Cited by7 opinions
- Jackson Hill Coal & Coke Co. v. BalesIndiana Supreme Court · 1915
- Moratzky v. WirthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
- In Re Estate of BoeseSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
- Wigglesworth v. BrodskySuperior Court of Delaware · 1920
- Boese v. LangleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.