Minneapolis, St. Paul, Rochester & Dubuque Electric Traction Co. v. Harkins
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Proceeding in the district court for Dakota county to condemn a right of way over certain land in that county for an electric traction railway under the power of eminent domain. Commissioners appointed as provided by statute awarded $610 to the owners of the land as damages. Prom this award, the traction company appealed to the district court.
Read the full summary
Proceeding in the district court for Dakota county to condemn a right of way over certain land in that county for an electric traction railway under the power of eminent domain. Commissioners appointed as provided by statute awarded $610 to the owners of the land as damages. Prom this award, the traction company appealed to the district court. The case was tried before Crosby, J., and a jury which rendered a verdict assessing respondent’s damages at $1,000. Prom an order denying the company’s motion for a new trial, it appealed to this court.
1Opinion of the CourtStart, C. J.
The Minneapolis, St. Paul, Rochester & Dubuque Electric Traction Company, herein referred to as the “Company,” instituted proceedings in the district court of the county of Dakota to secure a right of way for its proposed railway over certain lands in that county, including the farm of the respondent. Commissioners were appointed, who awarded the respondent $610 damages for the taking of his land, and the company appealed to the district court of the county of Dakota. The jury in the district court awarded the respondent $1,000 damages, and the company appealed from an order denying its…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Union Depot, Street Railway & Transfer Co. v. BrunswickSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
- Derosia v. Winona & St. Peter RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1872
- Sherwood v. St. Paul & Chicago Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1874
- Davidson v. GastonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1871
- Mantorville Railway & Transfer Co. v. Teunis SlingerlandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State, by G. A. Youngquist v. AndersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
- Housing & Redevelopment Authority v. Minneapolis Metropolitan Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1966
- Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. v. RehnkeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911
- Minneapolis, St. Paul, Rochester & Dubuque Electric Traction Co. v. ForstromSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1909