Legal Opinion

Pickett v. Nelson

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided April 17, 1888PublishedCited by 16 opinions

APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Green County. The following statement of the case was prepared by Mr. Justice Cassoday: This is an action for damages for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close, described as seventy-four acres, on or about May 1, 1885. The answer is a general denial.

Read the full summary

APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Green County. The following statement of the case was prepared by Mr. Justice Cassoday: This is an action for damages for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close, described as seventy-four acres, on or about May 1, 1885. The answer is a general denial. The court charged the jury, in effect, that the seventy-four acres described was off from the west side of fractional lots 1, 5, 6, and 8, in section 6 described, and all lying on the east side of the line running north and south through the center of the section; that both parties claimed title to the…

1Opinion of the CourtCassoday, J.

The record is not certified to contain all the evidence. This being so, the facts stated above, and *544taken from the charge, must be treated as verities. At the time of the alleged trespass, the parties to this action were, respectively, the owners of adjoining farms. There was a dispute as to the north and south line between such farms. The plaintiff owned the farm on the west side of the line, and the defendant the farm on the east side of the line. The claims of the respective parties as to the location of-such line at the north end differed some seventeen rods. The Wemple contract with…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Turner v. BakerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1876
  2. Blair v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1852
  3. Vosburgh v. . TeatorNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
  4. McMillan v. WehleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1882
  5. Whitney v. RobinsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1881

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Bahr v. ImusUtah Supreme Court · 2011
  2. Bayhouse v. UrquidesIdaho Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Buza v. WojtalewiczWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
  4. Peters v. ReichenbachWisconsin Supreme Court · 1902
  5. Nagel v. PhilipsenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1958

11 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