Minneapolis Mill Co. v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.
48 N.W. 1132, 46 Minn. 330, 1891 Minn. LEXIS 319
Opinion
So far as the defendant relies for a defence upon dedication of the real estate to public use, and the right of plaintiff to bringejeetment, the questions are disposed of by the opinion in Watson v. Chicago, Mil. & St. Paul Ry. Co., supra, p. 321.
Order reversed.
Note. A motion for veargument of this case was denied July 1, 1891.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Minneapolis Mill Co. v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co., 48 N.W. 1132, 46 Minn. 330, 1891 Minn. LEXIS 319 (Mich. 1891).
48 N.W. 1132 (Minneapolis Mill Co. v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Turner v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad
142 S.W.2d 455 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1940)
Minneapolis Mill Co. v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.
60 N.W. 341 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1894)
Minneapolis Western Ry. Co. v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Ry. Co.
59 N.W. 983 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1894)
Minneapolis Mill Co. v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Ry. Co.
53 N.W. 639 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1892)