Lohman v. St. Paul, Stillwater & Taylor's Falls Railroad
Supreme Court of Minnesota
This action is similar to the one next preceding, being commenced in the same court for the same relief, and with the same result; and is brought to this court upon a like appeal. A point not made in the preceding case, but the one upon which this appeal is determined, is fully stated in the opinion;
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Berry, J.
This case presents a state of facts similar to that presented in-Weir, against the same defendant, *175in'which an opinion has been filed at this term. The defendant in this case, as in that, attempts to justify its entry upon and appropriation of plaintiff’s land, by setting up proceedings for condemnation taken under ch. 34 Gen. St.
But this case differs from that in this essential particular, viz.: in that case, personal notice of the meeting of the commissioners as required by statute was served upon Weir, who was a resident of the county in which his land lay $ while in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Harrington v. St. Paul & Sioux City RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1871
3Cited by3 opinions
- Jacksonville, Tampa & Key West Railway Co. v. AdamsSupreme Court of Florida · 1891
- Myers v. Duluth Transfer Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Northern Pacific Railroad v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota · 1880