Alleman v. Director General
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Mower county to recover $1,350 damages for hooding plaintiff’s farm. The answer set up the statute of limitations. The case was tried before Catherwood, J., who when plaintiff rested and at the close of the testimony denied defendant’s motion for a directed verdict, and a jury which returned a verdict for $118.18. Defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict was denied.
Read the full summary
Action in the district court for Mower county to recover $1,350 damages for hooding plaintiff’s farm. The answer set up the statute of limitations. The case was tried before Catherwood, J., who when plaintiff rested and at the close of the testimony denied defendant’s motion for a directed verdict, and a jury which returned a verdict for $118.18. Defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict was denied. From the judgment entered pursuant to the verdict, defendants appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.
The appeal is from a judgment awarding plaintiff damages for the *161flooding of Ms farm. The only ground upon which a reversal is asked is that the court erred in denying defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
The right of way of defendant’s railway extends through plaintiff’s 140-acre farm. It runs nearly north and south. A public highway intersects the farm east and west, crossing the right of way by a viaduct under the track. The railway track is laid on a high embankment constructed in part from a borrow pit on the westerly side thereof. That part of the farm north of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Sloggy v. DilworthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
- McCarty v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
- Radke v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Bartlett v. SimanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1878
3Cited by1 opinion
- Paving Lincoln Avenue v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923