Legal Opinion

Lawrenz v. Langford Electric Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided November 24, 1939No. 32,094PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Julius J. Olson, Justice.

Defendant Langford Electric Company appeals from an order denying its blended motion for judgment notwithstanding or a new trial. Its codefendant has not appealed.

Hereafter we shall refer to appellant as “Langford company” and to the other defendant as the “association.”

This was an action to recover treble damages pursuant to the provisions of 2 Mason Minn. St. 1927, § 9585, the claim being that defendants entered upon plaintiff’s land “and did, without the leave of plaintiff, wilfully, wrongfully and wantonly cut down and destroy” certain trees, thereby damaging his…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Wooden-Ware Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
  2. Wakefield v. DaySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
  3. Summers v. Midland Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
  4. Hueston v. Mississippi & Rum River Boom Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
  5. Shearer v. BarnesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1912

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Meixner v. BueckslerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
  2. Kisch v. SkowSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
  3. Wyatt v. SweitzCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
  4. Langford Electric Co. v. Employees Mutual Indemnity Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
  5. Clark v. SherriffSupreme Court of Iowa · 1956

6 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