Tew v. Webster
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Fillmore county. After the former appeal reported in 103 Minn. 110, judgment was entered in favor of defendant. Defendant’s motion to strike plaintiff’s demand for a second trial from the files was granted, Kingsley, J., and from the order granting it, plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtStart, C. J.
This action was commenced in the district court of the county of Fillmore by the owner of a water power against the owner of a lower one to abate so much of his mill dam as caused the water to flow back upon the plaintiff’s mill privileges, and to enjoin the maintenance of the defendant’s dam at such a level as to turn water back into the plaintiff’s tail race and upon his water wheel. The cause was tried by the court without a jury. Findings of fact were made favorable to the defendant, and as a conclusion of law the court directed that the action be dismissed upon its merits. The plaintiff.…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Gahre v. BerrySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
- Somerville v. DonaldsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1879
- Buffalo Land & Exploration Co. v. Hugh P. StrongSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
- Godfrey v. ValentineSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
- City of St. Paul v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Peters v. City of DuluthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1912
- Bracken v. TronesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1912