Township of Blakely v. Devine
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court for Scott •county, where the issues were tried by Macdonald, J., and a jury, upon whose special findings a judgment was ordered for plaintiff, and the defendant’s motion for a new trial was denied.
1Opinion of the CourtVanderburgh, J.
The substance of the complaint in this case is that the defendant, in July, 1884, entered upon the public highway where the same crosses his farm, and then and there dug a ditch along the travelled track, a distance of about 30 rods in length, and at the south end of the ditch built an embankment, whereby the waters ihat naturally, and have from time beyond memory, passed west of *54the highway were dammed up and overflowed upon the highway at the north end of the ditch, and thereby threatened seriously to damage such highway. The defendant’s answer shows that in the year 1882 the plaintiff…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hogenson v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
- Beard v. MurphySupreme Court of Vermont · 1864
3Cited by8 opinions
- Brown v. Winona & Southwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Rowe v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Jordan v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Township of Hutchinson v. FilkSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- Robbins v. Village of WillmarSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.