The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1906-06-15
Supreme Court
&, r. Johnson. rpsDondent va

&. r. johnson, respondent. VS.. the Town OF
Syllabus: Upon petition signed by twenty
ave signers, twenty-one of whom were free
holders. the county commissioners commenced
proceedings to lay out and establish highway
running into two townships. No assessment of
damages was made required by the statute
The route of the highway was established and
the supervisors were directed to it to be
opened. A.. whose land was thus. taken or
attempted to be taken, appealed from the order
OF the commissioners, but the: appeal was dis
missed BY the court because 1t had not been
properly taken. The. commissioners. then re-
moved As fence, caused the road to be opened
but A. replaced the fence and has since main
tanned it. A. then fled claim for damages
S Mt made an effort to Withdraw
allowed the claim In part only. A. appealed
from the award and the appeal Is still pending.
Before the commissioners thus acted on the bill
A. commenced this action to have the entire
proceedings declared null and void and enjoin
the township authorities from opening the high
way in pursuance Of the order OF the commits
! eioners.
Held. (a) that as the petition was not signed
by twenty-f four freeholders as required BY the
statute the commissioners acquired no jurisdic-
ton; (b) that A. elected his remedy by action
and is not estopped by his conduct with refer
ence to the appeal from the order of the COM
missioners from proceeding in equity for an
1a5gncio On &c? seetion 1856 general statutes
laid out and opened, and is in use by the public.
put, BY reason OF some irregnlarity or omission,
damages have not been assessed or paid It is
not substitute for the assessment of damages
for the taking Of land for public highway,
required to be paid or secured before the road
Is opened. (d) The owner of land which the
authorities are proceeding to take for public
highway without compliance with. the provisions
OF the statute constitution with REFER
ence to damages, may enJotn the proceedings
until his damages are determined and paid or
secured. s.-.,.s,gy- A.. Il
Judgment affirmed ','s- Elliott, J.
Z,
George W. Peabody, respondent, VS.. Citizens
State Bank of st. Charles and Charles F.
Knapp, appellants.
Syllabus: Ftrst-In an action to recover dam
ages for the wrongful and malicious protest of
bank check it is held that the evidence sus-
tains the findings of the trial court
Second-When such check is wrongfully
protested the drawer may recover temperate
compensatory damages without alleging and
proving special damages. $500
Third.The right to recover such damages is
NOT connned to trader in the restricted sense
IN which the term is used in the bankruptcy
laws but extends to any person who is engaged
in business and whose credit is thus necessarily
injured s.a .7.1-.z7Gss
Judgment affirmed. Elliott. j.
Julius Koschman, respondent, vs. Charles R.
Ash, appellant 100 EN
Syllabus: The duty rests upon an employee To
inspect simple and common tool to discover de-
fects which arise from the ordinary use Of such
Instruments. ssS=
hammer which was purchased by the employer
from a wholesale hardware dealer and which
was in good condition when delivered to the
employee.
Order reversed. Elliott ]. q
Frederick Lockwood, respondent s.TF. NJ Geier
ct al. appellants 49,
Syllabus: In reforming a contract equity
looks at the substance and not at the form of
transactions, and gives effect not to mere.
words which the parties may have used, but to
their actual intentions, and .enforces the agree
(nent which the parties really made, not that