Kieckenapp v. Supervisors
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by Charles F. Kieckenapp from a judgment of the district court for Rice county in favor of defendants, after an order, Buck-ham, J., denying a motion for a new trial.
1Opinion of the CourtCanty, J.
Kieckenapp was the occupant and owner of land through which the town supervisors laid out a highway. He appealed to the district court from the order laying out the same, on the following grounds, and for the following purpose, as stated in the notice of appeal: “That said order, determination, and award are and each of them is void; that said highway is unnecessary; that the damages occasioned thereby to appellant are two hundred dollars; that the amount of damages awarded appellant was but twenty-five dollars. And you are hereby notified that said appeal is brought both in relation to said…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Foot v. . StilesNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Town of Lyle v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
3Cited by10 opinions
- Hurst v. Town of MartinsburgSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
- Commissioners of Highways v. SmithIllinois Supreme Court · 1905
- County of Martin v. KampertSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
- Sorenson v. School District No. 28Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- Town of Tyrone v. BurnsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.