Brammer v. Iowa Telephone Co.
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Franklin District Court. — R. M. Wright, Judge. Ti-ie action is, in effect, one claiming damages for a trespass committed by the defendant in putting its telephone poles and telephone line upon the land of plaintiff. He had a verdict.
1Opinion of the CourtSalinger, J.
1. Telegraphs AND TELEPHONES : construction : . following good-faith survey by engineer. It is charged in the petition that for what defendant did, it “never received any permit.” A general denial interposed challenges this averment. A motion to direct verdict for defendant asserts that the evidence fails to prove that the line complained of is not located within a highway legally laid out and established on the west side of the plaintiff’s land, and that the line is upon plaintiff’s land. Further, that, if a verdict should go against defendant, it would be the duty of the court to set such…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hendershott v. City of OttumwaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1877
- Pollard v. BaldwinSupreme Court of Iowa · 1867
- Wolfe v. Erie Telegraph & Telephone Co.United States Circuit Court · 1887
- Taeger v. RiepeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1894
- State ex rel. Hart v. RosencransSupreme Court of Iowa · 1884
3Cited by1 opinion
- Sheridan County v. SpiroWyoming Supreme Court · 1985