Hurley v. Mississippi & Rum River Boom Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Plaintiff, claiming to be the owner of the piece of land indicated on the diagram in the opinion and lying between the Mississippi river and blocks 25, 26, and 82, brought this action in the district court for Hennepin county, in April, 1882, to recover damages for the alleged wrongful and unlawful possession and use of such land by defendant, and to restrain defendant from entering upon or using it.
Read the full summary
Plaintiff, claiming to be the owner of the piece of land indicated on the diagram in the opinion and lying between the Mississippi river and blocks 25, 26, and 82, brought this action in the district court for Hennepin county, in April, 1882, to recover damages for the alleged wrongful and unlawful possession and use of such land by defendant, and to restrain defendant from entering upon or using it. The specific acts of user complained of were the maintenance of booms in front of the land, kept in place by fastenings upon the land, and cutting off plaintiff’s access to the river, and also…
1Opinion of the CourtVanderburgh, J.
In the year 1850, a survey and plat of what is known as Bottineau’s addition to St. Anthony was made, but the plat, not being properly acknowledged and certified,, constituted no *145statutory dedication to the public of any streets or public grounds. A plat purporting to represent such survey was, however, filed in the office of the register of deeds of Eamsey county, in which the land was then situated, and there still remains among the files and records of that county a map or plat of that description. The land in controversy is indicated by a blank space on the plat, as shown by the annexed…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Trustees of Watertown v. Cowen & BaggNew York Court of Chancery · 1834
- Jackson ex dem. Yates v. HathawayNew York Supreme Court · 1818
- Bartlett v. City of BangorSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1878
- State v. TraskSupreme Court of Vermont · 1834
- Warden v. BlakleyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1873
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Tissino v. MavrakisWyoming Supreme Court · 1951
- London & San Francisco Bank, Ltd. v. City of OaklandCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1898
- Great Northern Railway Co. v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
- Haggard v. MitchellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920
- Smith v. City of BeloitWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.