Case Name: CLARK D. BLANCHARD v. TOWN OF CULDRUM; SAME v. TOWN OF SWANVILLE
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Minnesota
Decision Date: 1915-12-31
Citations: 131 Minn. 494
Docket Number: Nos. 19,526, 19,527—(174, 175)
Parties: CLARK D. BLANCHARD v. TOWN OF CULDRUM. SAME v. TOWN OF SWANVILLE.
Judges: 
Reporter: Minnesota Reports
Volume: 131
Pages: 494–495

Head Matter:
CLARK D. BLANCHARD v. TOWN OF CULDRUM. SAME v. TOWN OF SWANVILLE.
December 31, 1915.
Nos. 19,526, 19,527—(174, 175).
Highway.
Appeals from orders of a town board denying a petition to lay out a highway. Verdicts in favor of petitioner. On appeal to this court held: The evidence was conflicting but the verdicts were sustained by the evidence. [Reporter.]
Prom an order of the board of supervisors of the town of Culdrum and from an order of the board of supervisors of the town of Swanville refusing to lay out a certain highway, C. D. Blanchard appealed to the district court for Morrison county. The appeals were heard together before Parsons, J., and a jury which returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff. Prom the judgments entered pursuant to the verdict, defendants appealed.
Affirmed.
N. N. Bergheim and G. Bosenmeier, for appellants.
A. H. Vernon, for respondent.
Reported in 155 N. W. 1102.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Appellant in each of these cases petitioned the town board to lay out a certain highway. In each case, the town board, after a hearing on the petition, made an order denying the prayer of the petition and refusing to lay out the highway. Prom each of these orders the petitioner appealed to the district court. The cases were tried together and separate verdicts were returned in favor of the petitioner, reversing the orders of the town boards and requiring the highway to be laid out. Judgment was entered on the verdict in each case. From these judgments the town boards appeal.
The real question in each of these cases is whether the verdict is sustained by the evidence. An examination of the record discloses evidence sufficient, if true, to support the verdict. The evidence was conflicting, but its weight, truth or falsity were for the jury to determine.
Judgment affirmed in each case.