The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1905-06-09
SUPREME COURT
BOOM COMPANY
MUST PAY FARMER
HELD LIABLE FOR DAMAGES
CAUSED BY FLOOD.
Log Jam Put John osborn's Farm I'm
der Water and Left Debris Which
Rendered It Unfit for Cultivation
Supreme Court Affirms Order Giving
the Farmer Damages.

The supreme court today held that
the Mississippi and Rum River Boom
company is liable for damage to abut.
ting property by floods resulting from
congestion of logs in the river. The
decision is in the case Of John E. Os-
born, respondent, VS.. the company, ap-
pellant, and the syllabus, written by
Judge Brown, is as follows:
In an action to recover damages for
! injuries to plaintiffs farm caused by the
alleged wrongful acts of defendant, it
appeared that defendant, by permitting an
accumulation of logs in the Mississippi
| river adjacent to plaintiffs premises,
! caused the waters thereof to overflow it's
4 banks and cast upon plaintiffs land large
quantities of sand, driftwood and other
debris, thereby rendering it unfit for the
uses to (Which it had been adapted. z@
Evidence was offered by defendant
tending to show that the injuries COM
planned of were temporary, and that the
land could, at a cost estimated by the
witnesses be restored to it's former con-
dition. Plaintiff claimed that the in
juries were in their nature permanent.
The court charged the jury that the
measure of PLAINTIFFS damages was the
difference in value Of the farm before
and after the wrongful acts of defend
ant: Held not error. but correct state
ment of the general rule applicable to
i such cases. Held, further. that If de-
PENDANT desired the question whether the
4 cost of restoring the premises to their
former condition was less than the diff
ference in value, and hence the proper
: rule of damages, submitted to the jury,
the court should have been requested to
so charge. The failure to give such in
struction was not, in the absence Of such
a request, reversible error.
Order affirmed. Brown, ].
I A Tax Ruling.
A decision relating to taxes is of in
4 terest at this time. It was given in the
\ the board of county commissioners of
/ Ramsey county, Minnesota, respondent.
1 The syllabus, written by Judge Jaggard
is as follows: f,.-a-
: Where refunded taxes which were
sought to be recovered by inclusion In
the tax list for subsequent year, We're
not Jumped with current taxes, but were
! separately stated year by year so as tc
| correctly set forth the name of the own
err, the description Of the premises anc
the amount charged against each trac
| and year. Held, that the list as pub
lished and as entered in the judgment
roll were valid upon collateral attack
Order affirmed. -s-.a Et.
Other Decisions.
Titles and dispositions of other case:
were as follows:
State, ex rel,s5 Dora Lehman, in behal
of Arlene Martin, respondent, VS.. William
G. Martin ct; AL defendants, William c
Martin, appellant. Order reversed.
BslI2S - Brown, J.
. Matthew Brown ct al, plaintiffs, Mat
:. thew Brown, appellant, VS.. @Patr1c
Dooley, ct al, defendants. Frank Hamel
. Ind a ffirmed.S
Lovely, J.
Oscar Swanson, respondent, VS.. Waite
D. Boutell and William T. Boutell, part
ners as Boutell Bros, appellants. 4Judg
ment reversed.--Lewis, j.
Y o. Brown, respondent, vs.. j:
Pinkerton, appellant. Order reversed an
| new trial granted.-Love:y, ). a.
Theodore O. Loveland and James !
Records, copartners as Equitable Manu-
F.. featuring company, respondents,
Charles Gravel and Charles r. Grave
copartners as Gravel Mercantile con
pany, appellants. Order aff1rmed.-S1ar
G. j. zs&[
The Minneapolis Threshing Machir
company, appellant Vs. Commodore !
Jones, ct al, defendants, Flour City Ma
tional bank, ct al, respondents. gOrdf
Acknowledgment j.
F. B. Myrick, respondent, vs. Frank
Purcell ct al, appellants. Order afflrme'
- l-Jaggard, J. .s.. - &..+~
J. A. Swenson, appellant VS.. Board {
supervisors of-town of Hallock RESPOND
ents Order reversed and new trl
acknowledgement, J.
John G. Ballard ct al, appellants v
John Anderson ct al, defendants, tt
Detroit Light and Land company, r
spondent. Judgment reversed.-Ja
gard, ].
J. H. Miller, respondent, VS.. J. Norr
&c., carnes appellant. Order affirmed.
Lewis, J.. ..-E. ''.-
- George McPheeters, appellant vs..
- N. Ronning, ct al, respondents. JUDI
ment reversed-LeWis, j.
\ Walter johnson, by his guardian i
Item, Hoken Johnson, appellant, y
'Crookston Lumber company, responder
order reversed and judgment ordered
appellant-Lovely, J.
Marie M. Owsley ct al, respondent
VS.. Nels Johnson ct al, detendan1
.. Michael Gallagher ct ais appellants y
der affirmed.-Brown, j.