Legal Opinion

Amato v. Haraden

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 14, 1968No. 40633PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Murphy, Justice.

Defendants appeal from an order denying their alternative motion for amended findings or a new trial in an action to determine a boundary by practical location. The action was brought by Fred Amato against his neighbors, Helen Elizabeth and Mary Jane Haraden, to determine the boundary line between lots owned and occupied by them. The court found for plaintiff, and defendants assert error contending that the evidence was not sufficient to establish boundary by practical location nor to establish adverse possession.

The plaintiff and defendants are adjoining property owners in…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Beardsley v. CraneSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
  2. Fishman v. NielsenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1952
  3. Bjerketvedt v. JacobsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
  4. Aldrich v. WilsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1963

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Theros v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
  2. Robinson v. LamottSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
  3. Gabler v. FedorukCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2008
  4. Gabler v. FedorukCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2008

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API