Diedrichs v. Northwestern Union Railway Co.

33 Wis. 219
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court
DecidedJune 15, 1873
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 33 Wis. 219 (Diedrichs v. Northwestern Union Railway Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wisconsin Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Diedrichs v. Northwestern Union Railway Co., 33 Wis. 219 (Wis. 1873).

Opinion

Lyon, J.

There could be no doubt of the plaintiff’s right to the injunction asked for, if the defendant is about to take permanent possession of his land without a determination, by some legal method, of the sum to be paid to the plaintiff therefor, and payment or tender of such sum to the plaintiff or some person authorized by law to receive the same. Bohlman v. The Green Bay & Lake Pepin R'y Co., 30 Wis., 105, and cases cited. But to entitle him to such injunction, he must show that the defendant threatens or intends to take possession of his land without making such payment or tender. The complaint in this action lacks this indispensable averment. Every averment which it contains may be true, and still the defendant may not have threatended or intended to enter upon the plaintiff’s land (until after it had made full compensation therefor as required by the constitution and laws of the state. This essential averment cannot be supplied by inference. It must be positively made, or the complaint will be held bad on demurrer.

[222]*222The only relief demanded in this action is, that the defendant be restrained from taking possession of the plaintiff’s land until it makes compensation therefor. The complaint fails to state facts which entitle the .plaintiff to such relief. Hence it fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and the demurrer thereto for that cause was properly sustained.

By the Court. — The order sustaining the demurrer is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. P. Lorillard Co.
193 N.W. 613 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1923)
Rothecker v. Wolhowe
166 N.W. 515 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1918)
McCord v. Eastern Railway Co. of Minnesota
116 N.W. 845 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1908)
Phenix v. Frampton
29 Nev. 306 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1907)
Town of Syracuse v. Weyrick
76 N.E. 559 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1906)
Jasper v. McNeley
56 Mo. App. 556 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1894)
Church v. Joint School District No. 12
13 N.W. 272 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1882)
Poirier v. Fetter
20 Kan. 47 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1878)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
33 Wis. 219, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/diedrichs-v-northwestern-union-railway-co-wis-1873.