Town of Martinsburg v. Butler
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in. the district court for Renville county against E. J. Butler and Mat Schnichels to recover $250, alleged to have been paid ont on two claims against plaintiff town, upon their authority, while acting as town supervisors. The answers were general denials. The facts are stated in the opinion. The case was tried before Powers, J., who at the close of plaintiffs testimony dismissed the action. Prom an order denying plaintiffs motion for a new trial, it appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtO’Brien, J.
The defendants were supervisors of the town of Martinsburg, the plaintiff in this action. Defendant'Butler was the president of the board, and the owner of the west one-half of a section of land situated in the township, and hereafter referred to as section 22. Public highways ran upon the east and west sides of this section, and were, because of water, rendered partially unfit for travel. Without being established by proper statutory proceedings, drains were, under the employment of various landowners, constructed upon private property, including section 22, which not only drained wet and…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Stone v. BevansSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
- Bailey v. StrachanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
- Young v. City of MankatoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1905
- Hollinshead v. Von GlahnSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1860
3Cited by5 opinions
- Schramsky v. HollmichelSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1951
- Burns v. EsslingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
- Town of Buyck v. BuyckSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
- Bjelland v. City of MankatoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
- State v. DanculovicSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926