State ex rel. Attorney General v. Southern Minnesota Railroad
Supreme Court of Minnesota
The state upon the relation of the attorney general, based upon the affidavit of Thomas McRoberts, applied to this court for a writ of mandamus to compel the defendant to construct its railroad to the town of La Orescent. An alternative writ was granted commanding the defendant to build such road, or show cause why it should not. The defendant appeared and showed cause by answer, and the case was submitted upon the affidavit, answer, and briefs of counsel.
Read the full summary
The state upon the relation of the attorney general, based upon the affidavit of Thomas McRoberts, applied to this court for a writ of mandamus to compel the defendant to construct its railroad to the town of La Orescent. An alternative writ was granted commanding the defendant to build such road, or show cause why it should not. The defendant appeared and showed cause by answer, and the case was submitted upon the affidavit, answer, and briefs of counsel. The application is founded principally upon statutes of the state, and the act of congress granting lands to the state to aid in the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Berry, J.
Por the sake of convenience, we will in this opinion designate the moving party as the plaintiff, and the railroad company as the defendant. The important question in the case is whether upon the facts appearing, the defendant can be compelled by mandamus to construct its railroad to the village of La Crescent.
As in our ’opinion the question must be answered in the negative, it will not be necessary to consider the objection' taken by the defendant to the form in which, and the party .by whom and for whom this application is made.
“ By our statute (Sec. 2, ch. 80, Gen’l…
2Cited by28 opinions
- Geib v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
- Gates v. Boston & New York Air Line RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1885
- Selectmen of Amesbury v. Citizens Electric Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
- State ex rel. Cunningham v. JackU.S. Circuit Court for the District of South Carolina · 1902
- San Antonio Street Railway Co. v. State Ex Rel. ElmendorfTexas Supreme Court · 1897
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.