Legal Opinion

Ambs v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided August 19, 1890PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Appeal by Julius Gross, one of the plaintiffs, from an order of the district court for Ramsey county, Kelly, J., presiding, refusing a new trial after verdict directed for defendant.

1Opinion of the CourtDickinson, J.

This is an action to recover the possession of a lot of land in the city of St. Paul, described as lot 6, in block 86, in St. *267Paul Proper, so called. The court directed a verdict for the defendant. This lot comprises a part of a larger tract of land, conveyed by patent from the United States to Louis Robert, in June, 1849. Both parties claim to have derived title from Robert. The land including this lot appears to have been platted into town lots by Robert, Guerin, and others, as early as 1847, although the plat was not acknowledged until February, 1849. In that platting the land in question…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Champlain & St. Lawrence Rail Road v. ValentineNew York Supreme Court · 1853
  2. Boggs v. VarnerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1843
  3. Osborne v. EndicottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1856
  4. Baldwin v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
  5. Ingersoll v. TruebodyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Pich v. LankfordTexas Supreme Court · 1957
  2. D'Autremont v. Anderson Iron Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
  3. State ex rel. Blake v. DunnSupreme Court of Kansas · 1925
  4. Franzen v. HammondWisconsin Supreme Court · 1908
  5. Dr. Ward's Medical Co. v. WolleatSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API