The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1898-06-08
RELATING TO TITLES.
One of the Decisions of the Supreme
Court


Court.
Four decisions were handed down by the
supreme court yesterday, in one OF which
are cleared number of troublesome ques-
lions relating to real estate titles in st. Paul.
The syllabi of the decisions are as follows
Josephine M. Smith, appellant, vs.. The City
OF st. Paul.. defendant; st. Paul Trust
Company ct al. respondents.
l: Inc rule applied that the streets on
detective plat may be dedicated to the pub
to the plat
2. Held, the plat was not SO wanting in
description that it could not with competent
extrinsic evidence, be located on the ground.
8. Held, a legal title by estoppel Is not
mere equity which must be specially plead
4. Held under section 1852. G.: S. 1894, a
tax Judgment for taxes attempted to be as
sessed on part of public street, is VOID
for want OF jurisdiction.
5. Held, it sufficiently appears that the
1nterVenorS are taxpayers.
6. The case was tried on one theory and
Judgment ordered for plaintiff.
Held. on the conceded facts, the court was
warranted in holding that plaintiff was not
taken by surprise when on a different theory
the court changed its order for Judgment
and ordered that plaintiff take nothing by
this action.
Z. Held. the intervenor. S. is specially in
Jured by the attempt made through an
cate ~ feet in width of the street In front
of the lot adjoining hers; is therefore not
estopped by the judgment against the city
In that action, and may. as a general tax.
payer prevent the taking of money out OF
the city treasury to pay damages awarded
FOR the 80 feet in condemnation proceedings
instituted after such judgment
.. Held, the court did not. because OF Ger
tain facts occurring since the trial. err in
denying new trial. Order affirmed:
JdYius H. Shaw and E. F. sahler, co-partners
as Shaw & Sahler. appellants, VS.. e. HJel;-
man ct al. defendants Adolphus Busch
and Anheuser Busch Brewing Association.
respondents.
The contract agreed to construct "a plumb
and maintain the plant in good order fer
one year after it was completed. and execute
a written guaranty to that effect. In con-
sideration thereof, the owner of the properly
agreed to pay the contractor certain sum
the end of such year. The latter performed
the contract. and in doing so, made repairs
three times during, such year after the plant ant
last day of the year.. The lien statement
was filed within ninety days thereafter.
Held, as against such owner. the contract Is
an entirety. and the lien statement was lied
in time, although as against third parties &C
curing rights in the property for value after
the. completion of the plant and without &C. ual
notice or knowledge Of the contract. 1t is not
an entirety and the lien statement is not
filed in time W
But held. it does not appear that the re-
brancerss for value without notice. Order
reversed. ) q 81 -Canty, j.
c. E. Thorne. appellant, VS.. G. L. Allen.
The plaintiff held a chattel mortgage on
defendants grain and also held possession OF
cure other advances made by him to de-
PENDANT. Plaintiff with defendants consent
sold part of the grain for $50 and retained
the proceeds, but no application of them was
nv n
ment of the one debt or the other. There
after plaintiff surrendered the possession OF
Of fs gad 70 and
tanned his said mortgage on the grain. There
after plaintiff brought replevin for the grain.
and on the trial sought to apply the $50 in
vances. and defendant sought to apply the
same in payment Of the mortgage debt.
Held, 1t would be inequitabe after plant #
had voluntarily relinQuished his said lien to
apply the $50 on the mortgage debt and that
the same ought to be applied in payment of
the sum due for the advances. Order reversed
and new trial granSed.'a 4e2 -Canty, j.
Harry Rifey. respondent. VS.. Minneapolis &
St. Louis Railway Company. appellant.
by defendant in its yards in Minneapolis,
slipped on narrow ridge of ice between the
rails of the track fell and was struck by
moving car and was injured; the ridge of
ice was about two inches higher than the
rails, was concearI by covering Of fresh
snow and had been in this condition about
week before the injury. In an action to re-
cover damages for the injury
Held. it is question for the jury Whistler
not defendant was guilty of negligence in
failing to keep it's yard in reasonably SAFE
condition.
2. Whether defendant was guilty of con-
tributory negligence in walking along ahead
of slowly moving car to adjust the coupling
on the same so as to couple it to another car,
Held question for the jury.
g. Evidence that it was, and long had
been. customary for defendants brekemen
and switchmen thus to walk ahead of the
moving car when adjusting the coupling,
Held competent. Order affirmed.