Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Agerbeck

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 8, 1956No. 36,611PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Nelson, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order denying defendants’ motion for amended findings or for a new trial. The court below found plaintiffs entitled to a permanent injunction and thereby entitled to a mandatory injunction of the court compelling defendants to forthwith fill up a ditch on their land and on the adjacent public right-of-way. The matter was submitted to the court on all issues.

The questions involved in the main are whether the evidence sustains a finding that defendants unreasonably caused surface waters to flow in increased volume onto the plaintiffs’ land contrary to…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Sheehan v. FlynnSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894
  2. Enderson v. KelehanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1948
  3. S. H. Kress & Co. v. SharpMississippi Supreme Court · 1930
  4. Moore v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1911
  5. State v. WagnerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1951

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Kallevig v. HolmgrenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1972
  2. Evers v. WillabyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1989
  3. Bymark v. EnglertSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1969
  4. Argyelan v. HavilandIndiana Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Argyelan v. HavilandIndiana Supreme Court · 1982

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