Legal Opinion

Dickinson v. Ruble

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 12, 1941No. 32,930PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Hilton, Justice.

Upon a stipulation of facts, the trial judge found that a certain alleyway located upon plaintiff’s premises in the city of Willmar had been dedicated to the public and denied plaintiff’s request for an injunction. Plaintiff appeals from an order denying a motion for amended findings or a new trial.

Plaintiff acquired the premises in 1938 and shortly thereafter erected a building adjacent to a 10-foot strip of land which had for many years served as an alleyway across to the next street. Defendant owns the adjoining property, and it is to his use of the driveway that plaintiff…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. City of St. Paul v. ColterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1866
  2. Bolles v. CarliSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1866
  3. Carpenter v. GantzerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
  4. Klenk v. Town of Walnut LakeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
  5. Boye v. City of Albert LeaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1904

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Bosell v. RannestadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1948
  2. Keiter v. BergeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1945
  3. Security Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. C & C Investments, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1989
  4. Barth v. StenwickCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2009
  5. Allen v. Village of SavageSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1961

1 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