Case Name: N. E. Colstrum vs. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Company
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Minnesota
Decision Date: 1884-01-10
Citations: 31 Minn. 367
Docket Number: 
Parties: N. E. Colstrum vs. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Company.
Judges: 
Reporter: Minnesota Reports
Volume: 31
Pages: 367–368

Head Matter:
N. E. Colstrum vs. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Company.
January 10, 1884.
Complaint — Single Causes of Action — Inconsistent Prayers for Relief. — If the facts stated in a complaint constitute a single cause of action, a prayer for inconsistent forms of relief will not render the pleading demurrable on the ground of a misjoinder of several causes of action. The remedy is by motion.
Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Lochren, J., presiding, overruling a demurrer to the complaint for misjoinder of causes of action. The complaint alleges plaintiff’s ownership of certain described land, and that defendant, without right and unlawfully, entered upon and took and has since retained possession of the land, and built and has since operated its railway thereon, to plaintiff’s damage in the sum of $2,000. Judgment is demanded for the damages sustained, for possession of the land, and for an injunction to restrain the maintenance and operation of the railway on the land.
J. D. Springer, for appellant.
F. Hooker, for respondent.

Opinion:
Mitchell, J.
That the facts stated in the complaint constitute a single cause of action is too plain to require argument. If, in demanding judgment both for the possession of the premises, and also for an injunction restraining the continuance of the trespass upon them, the prayer asks for inconsistent forms of relief, the remedy is by motion, and not by demurrer for misjoinder of different causes of action. The demand for judgment forms no part of the "cause of action." Pomeroy on Remedies, § 452, 462; Durant v. Gardner, 19 How. Pr. 94.
Order affirmed.