Kral v. Boesch
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1ConcurrenceCrippen, Judge
I concur in the result. But the importance of this case may lie more in what it does not decide than in the decision itself.
Subject to often-stated limits, a landowner may cast surface water onto the property of a neighbor. Although the reasonable use doctrine is clear in most of its parts, there is remarkably little authority to guide us on the question of draining surface water by directly connecting a tile line into an existing line of a neighbor.
The controversy here involves a tile line, running on respondent Kral’s property and crossing onto appellant Boesch’s land, that has been in…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Duenow v. LindemanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1947
- Hagerty v. RadleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1949
- Evers v. WillabyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1989