Minnesota Supreme Court, 1888

Johnson v. Northern Pacific, Fergus Falls & Black Hills Railway Co.

Johnson v. Northern Pacific, Fergus Falls & Black Hills Railway Co.
Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided June 25, 1888 · Vanderburgh
39 Minn. 30; 38 N.W. 804; 1888 Minn. LEXIS 16 (Minnesota Reports)

Counsel

Bussell, Emery & Reed and Bcvwson é Hou.pt, for plaintiff. Jno. G. Bullitt, Jr., for defendant.

Can I rely on this case?

Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.

(as of 9/30/2026)

Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1966, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.

Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error

Johnson v. Northern Pacific, Fergus Falls & Black Hills Railway Co.

Cases that cite this one

4 later published cases cite this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Vanderburgh, J.

The parties have brought separate appeals. The plaintiff complains that the legal conclusion of the court that she is not entitled to an injunction is not supported by the facts found; and the defendant’s principal assignment of error is the finding and conclusion of the court that the plaintiff may maintain an action for such damages as she may show herself entitled to by reason of the maintenance of the embankment described in the complaint. Upon the argument neither party raised the point that there is no judgment or order in the case upon which to found an appeal to this ..court. Upon looking into the record, however, we find that each appeal is from the findings and conclusions of the court, which are referred to as orders in the notices of appeal. The only way in which these findings, or the direction for judgment thereon, can be reviewed, is by an appeal from the judgment or an order denying or granting .a new trial. No question of practice is better settled. Von Glahn v. Sommer, 11 Minn. 132, (203;) Shepard v. Pettit, 30 Minn. 119, (14 N. W. Rep. 511;) Thorp v. Lorenz, 34 Minn. 350, (25 N. W. Rep. 712,) and cases cited. Both appeals are therefore dismissed.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.