Sinell v. Town of Sharon
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
Julius J. Olson, Justice.
To plaintiff’s petition for a writ of mandamus “commanding and requiring the defendants to forthwith take steps to open up, grade and make suitable for safe public travel” a township road, defendants interposed a general demurrer. It was sustained by the trial judge, who directed that the alternative writ theretofore issued be quashed and ordered that the proceedings be dismissed on the ground that the petition did “not state facts sufficient to grant the relief therein sought and prayed for.” Plaintiff appeals from that order. .
The facts alleged may' be thus…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Brockman v. BrockmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
- Brandes v. CarpenterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
- Briggs v. BuzzellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
- Schmitt v. HagerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
- Sweet v. LowrySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
3Cited by10 opinions
- Citizens State Bank v. Raven Trading Partners, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
- State Ex Rel. Sawyer v. MangniSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
- Wells Fargo Bank, Minnesota, N.A. v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 2011
- Ebenezer Society v. Minnesota State Board of HealthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
- Waters v. PutnamSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1971
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.