Fairfield v. Barrette
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Cravrford County. Ejectment. • The facts are stated in the opinion. To the point that it was error not to instruct the jury that an agreement as to the boundary line might be inferred from the circumstances and the actions of the parties, they cited Fiahett v. Eelson, II "Wis. 546, and cases there cited.
1Opinion of the Court
Okton, J".
The plaintiff owns the east half of the northwest quarter of section 10, town 6, range 6 W., and the defendant the west half, which extend south to a highway which crosses said quarter section, by an irregular and somewhat of a circular line, near the south end. The plaintiff’s dwelling-house and other buildings stand on the north side of this highway, and on the east side of and very near the north and south division line of said quarter. Nearly thirty years ago there was a division fence standing near the supposed.north and south line of said quarter, which was replaced by one…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Sydnor v. PalmerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1871
- Graeven v. DievesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1887
- Tobey v. SecorWisconsin Supreme Court · 1884
- Zielke v. MorganWisconsin Supreme Court · 1880
- Perry v. WilliamsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1876
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Sheldon v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
- Vaught v. McClymondMontana Supreme Court · 1945
- Bettack v. ConachenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1940
- Hudson v. EricksonWyoming Supreme Court · 1950
- Ayers v. ReidelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1893
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.