Spencer v. St. Paul & Sioux City Railroad
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Scott county, Ghatfield, J., presiding, refusing a new trial. This, like the preceding and following cases, was an action for damages for alleged trespass on plaintiff’s land, the pleadings being, so far as material, the same as in those cases, except that in this the locus in quo is described as Lots 3 and 4, in Block 30, etc.
1Opinion of the CourtMcMillan, C. J.
The plaintiff, upon the trial offered in evidence proof of title to the premises described in the complaint, which fact of title was admitted by the defendant. The plaintiff then proved by testimony which is uncontradicted, and was received without objection, that the plaintiff resides with her husband on Lots 3 'and 4, Block 26, Shakopee City, and has resided there since May, 1866 that the railroad tracks of the defendant are located south of the dwelling-house, and on Second street, in front of these lots, and have been put there since plaintiff went to live on said premises.
*363The complaint,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Harrington v. St. Paul & Sioux City RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1871
3Cited by3 opinions
- Rauma v. BaileySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
- Ferguson v. HoganSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1878
- Igo v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1910