Johnson v. Raddohl
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
Knutson, Justice.
This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff.
1. There being no settled case or bill of exceptions, our inquiry must be limited to a consideration of whether the findings of fact sustain the conclusions of law and the judgment entered in conformity therewith. Peach v. Reed, 87 Minn. 375, 92 N. W. 229; Elton v. Northwestern Nat. L. Ins. Co. 192 Minn. 116, 255 N. W. 857; In re Estate of Miller, 196 Minn. 543, 265 N. W. 333; County of St. Louis v. Magie, 198 Minn. 127, 269 N. W. 105; 1 Dunnell, Dig. & Supp. § 344.
2. The action involves a dispute as to the boundary line…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Romans v. NadlerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
- Peach v. ReedSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
- Cameron v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
- Elton v. Northwestern National Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1934
- Lake Superior & Mississippi Railroad v. GreveSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1871
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Konantz v. SteinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1969
- Burns v. PlacheckiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
- Ebenhoh v. HodgmanCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2002
- Gangle v. SpirySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2018
- Meyers v. MeyersCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.