Nash v. Sullivan
Supreme Court of Minnesota
After the decision in Nash v. Sullivan, 29 Minn. 206, final judgment in ejectment was entered in favor of plaintiff in that action, a,nrl thereupon he brought this action in the district court for Polk county, to recover the value of the wheat raised by defendant during the years 1880 and 18S1 upon the land involved in the former action.
Read the full summary
After the decision in Nash v. Sullivan, 29 Minn. 206, final judgment in ejectment was entered in favor of plaintiff in that action, a,nrl thereupon he brought this action in the district court for Polk county, to recover the value of the wheat raised by defendant during the years 1880 and 18S1 upon the land involved in the former action. The action was tried, without a jury, by Stearns, J., who found that the defendant went into possession of the land in 1876, for the purpose of holding it under the United States homestead laws; that in 1879, the plaintiff became the equitable owner of the…
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
Upon the facts found by the court there can be no doubt but that the defendant was not a mere casual trespasser, but a disseizor, in the actual, exclusive, adverse possession of these premises from the time plaintiff’s title accrued, in October, 1879, until he was ejected by plaintiff, in June, 1882. The plaintiff now brings this •suit to recover the value of the grain which defendant sowed, cultivated, and harvested on the premises during the years 1880 and 1881, with his own labor and at his own expense, and removed from the premises before his eviction. Plaintiff has totally mistaken his…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Downs v. FinneganSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894
- Blew v. RitzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1901
- Ford Motor Co. v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
- Schuchard v. St. Anthony & Dakota Elevator Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
- Sons v. SonsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.