Legal Opinion

McClay v. Clark

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 17, 1890PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of §50.19, recovered by plaintiff in the municipal court of Minneapolis.

1Opinion of the CourtVanderburgh, J.

The parties are the owners of adjoining tracts of land, separated by a division fence. Formerly, while occupied by them, respectively, the tracts were wholly inclosed, both parties having the use and benefit of such division fence, which thus served as a partition fence between their lands, until about the year 1887, when it became insufficient by reason of decay, and required to be renewed or rebuilt. For three years or more, however, the fences of defendant, which served to inclose her land, have been removed, though the land is found by the court to be still occupied by John Clark, Sr.,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hale v. AndrewsIllinois Supreme Court · 1874
  2. Boenig v. HornbergSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1877

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. McBean v. McBeanOregon Supreme Court · 1900
  2. Pickerell v. DavisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1914
  3. Davis v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
  4. Miles v. AlthoffCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
  5. Rice v. KringlerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1994

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API