Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Raddohl

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided May 28, 1948No. 34,614PublishedCited by 6 opinions

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

  1. Romans v. NadlerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
  2. Peach v. ReedSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
  3. Cameron v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
  4. Elton v. Northwestern National Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1934
  5. Lake Superior & Mississippi Railroad v. GreveSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1871

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Konantz v. SteinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1969
  2. Burns v. PlacheckiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
  3. Ebenhoh v. HodgmanCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2002
  4. Gangle v. SpirySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2018
  5. Meyers v. MeyersCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985

1 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