Gundlach v. Hamm
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiff from an order of tbe district court for Bamsey county, Otis, J., denying a motion for a new trial.
1Opinion of the Court
STABT, O. J.
The appellant is, and has been for more than 10 years last past, the owner and in possession of lot 7 in block 56 in Arlington Hills addition to St. Paul, upon which he does and has during such time carried on a general grocery business in a store building thereon. He lives in a house on the adjoining lot 8, owned by his wife. Both lots front upon Fauquier street, and access to them is only from and along this street. On August 14, 1892, the respondent, without the consent of the appellant, and without authority of law, caused to be constructed, for his own private use and…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Adams v. Chicago, Burlington & Northern RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
- Aldrich v. WetmoreSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Shaubut v. St. Paul & Sioux City RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1875
- Rochette v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
- Barnum v. Minnesota Transfer Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
3Cited by13 opinions
- Vacation of Part of Town of HibbingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
- In re HullSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
- McKay v. City of EnidSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co. v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1906
- World Realty Co. v. City of OmahaNebraska Supreme Court · 1925
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.