Legal Opinion

Colson v. Salzman

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 6, 1956PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBroadfoot, J.

The plaintiffs first complain of finding of fact No. 17, which stated that the defendants, by virtue of the original deeds, have easements granting them riparian rights in the private-park reserve of said plat. It is contended that this finding is contrary to law. We agree with that contention. Shawano lake is an inland, navigable, meandered lake, and the title to the soil under the waters thereof is held by the state in trust for the benefit of the public for navigation purposes and its various incidents. Riparian owners have certain rights based upon title to the ownership of the-bank or…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Doemel v. JantzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Polebitzke v. John Week Lumber Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1914
  3. Union Falls Power Co. v. Marinette CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Hazelton v. PutnamWisconsin Supreme Court · 1850
  5. Attorney General ex rel. Askew v. SmithWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Stoesser v. Shore Drive PartnershipWisconsin Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Menzer v. Village of Elkhart LakeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Farnes v. Freeman LaneSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1968
  4. Schwartz v. Evangelical Deaconess Society of WisconsinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
  5. City of Madison v. TolzmannWisconsin Supreme Court · 1959

7 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