Foot v. Mississippi & Rum River Boom Co.
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 1899, 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
Cases that cite this one
1 later published case cites this decision.
- Gammons v. Gulbranson (Minn. 1899)
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
The only assignment of error which reaches any of the findings of fact made by the court below is the second, which, if liberally treated, challenges the correctness of the finding that Lund acted in good faith when he cut the logs on land belonging to the intervenor, Keith, and that such cutting was in the honest belief that he had a right so to do. A careful reading of the evidence bearing upon this finding compels us to say that quite a number of facts and circumstances indicate that Lund deliberately cut these logs without excuse or justification. But there was evidence which tended to establish his claim of good faith and that he was not a willful trespasser.
Although, in our opinion, the evidence preponderated in favor of the intervenor on this question, we cannot say that the finding is without evidence to sustain it. Other points made by counsel need not be specially mentioned, for they are inconsequential.
Order affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.