Austin v. Village of Tonka Bay
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Hennepin county against the county of Hennepin and village of Tonka Bay to recover $2,000 for injury to plaintiffs’ property. The case was tried before Dickinson, J., and a jury which returned a verdict for $500. The motion of defendant village for judgment notwithstanding the verdict was denied. From the judgment entered pursuant to the verdict, defendant village of Tonka Bay appealed.
1Opinion of the Court
Taylor, C.
In 1888, the county of Hennepin constructed a canal or waterway, known as the “narrows,” connecting upper Lake Minnetonka with lower Lake Minnetonka; and, apparently in the same year, laid out and established a county road which passed over the narrow neck of land between these lakes and crossed this canal. Travelers upon *361the highway were conveyed across the canal by a ferryboat. In 1901 Tonka Bay was incorporated and organized as a village, and that part of the county road within the limits of the village became a village street and was used as such. The canal forms the boundary…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- County of Chester v. BrowerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
- Vanderburgh v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Sallden v. City of Little FallsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
- Layman v. BeelerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1902
- Dallas County v. DillardSupreme Court of Alabama · 1908
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- McShane v. City of FaribaultSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- Boland v. City of Rapid CitySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1982
- Stuhl v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
- Gruntorad v. Hughes BrothersNebraska Supreme Court · 1955
- Patrick v. City of BellevueNebraska Supreme Court · 1957
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.