Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Romans v. Nadler, 14 N.W.2d 482.

66 citing documents.

Edward B. Berkner, Trustee of Berkner Living Trust, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
d 482, 485 (Minn. 1944), the district court explained that “[o]ccasional and sporadic trespasses for temporary purposes, because they do not indicate permanent occupation and appropriation of land, do not satisfy the requirements of hostility and continuity, and do not constitute adverse possession, even where they conti
Stephen Sawyer, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Dale LeRoy Tiede v. County of Le Sueur, Daniel J. Sullivan, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Dale LeRoy Tiede v. County of Le Sueur, Daniel J. Sullivan, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Robert W. Starbeck, individually, and As Trustee of the Arthur C. Starbeck Trust under agreement Dated August 21, … Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Robert W. Starbeck, individually, and As Trustee of the Arthur C. Starbeck Trust under agreement Dated August 21, … Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“The scope of a prescriptive easement is ‘measured and defined by the use made of the land giving rise to the easement.’” Block, d at 525-26 ().
Mary Ann Karnowski v. Thomas George Wimmer Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Mary Ann Karnowski v. Thomas George Wimmer Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Roger Saba, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
John Aydt, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174, 179–180, −86 (1944).
In re the Matter of the Application of Susan L. C. Mahoney to Register the Title to Certain … Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Matter of the Application of Susan L. C. Mahoney to Register the Title to Certain … Minn. Ct. App. 2017
See Gabler, d at 730 (quoting Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174, 174, ).
Johnson v. Paynesville Farmers Union Cooperative Oil Co. 817 N.W.2d 693 Minn. 2012
Gabler v. Fedoruk 756 N.W.2d 725 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Gabler v. Fedoruk 756 N.W.2d 725 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
What is at stake is title to the disputed land, because “[a]n easement by prescription is defined by the use made of the land giving rise to the easement and carries with it no title to or right of possession of the land itself,” Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174, 174 , , (1944), while “[t]he effect of a practical location of a boundary line is to divest one proprietor of a conceded title by deed[.]” Marek v. Jelinek, 121 Minn. 468, 470 , 141 N.W.
Hebert v. City of Fifty Lakes 744 N.W.2d 226 Minn. 2008
Hebert v. City of Fifty Lakes 744 N.W.2d 226 Minn. 2008
* * * [A prescriptive easement] is a servitude imposed upon corporeal property, and it gives no title to the land upon which it is imposed.” Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174, 181 , -87 (1944).
Magnuson v. Cossette 707 N.W.2d 738 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Magnuson v. Cossette 707 N.W.2d 738 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
See Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174, 181 , -87 (1944).
Ganje v. Schuler 659 N.W.2d 261 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Ganje v. Schuler 659 N.W.2d 261 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
As one case put it, the disseizor must not only possess the property, he or she must make that fact known by keeping their “flag flying.” Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174, 178
Heuer v. County of Aitkin 645 N.W.2d 753 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Heuer v. County of Aitkin 645 N.W.2d 753 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
at 657 (quoting and citing Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174,179 , ).
Boldt v. Roth 604 N.W.2d 117 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Boldt v. Roth 604 N.W.2d 117 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
see Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174, 177 , (applying requirements for proving adverse possession to prescriptive easements).
Rogers v. Moore 603 N.W.2d 650 Minn. 1999
Rogers v. Moore 603 N.W.2d 650 Minn. 1999
See Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174, 181 , -87 (1944).
Block v. Sexton 577 N.W.2d 521 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Block v. Sexton 577 N.W.2d 521 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
II The scope of a prescriptive easement is “measured and defined by the use made of the land giving rise to the ease *526 ment.” Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174, 181
Stanard v. Urban 453 N.W.2d 733 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Stanard v. Urban 453 N.W.2d 733 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
1 See *736 Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174, 178
Wheeler v. Newman 394 N.W.2d 620 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Wheeler v. Newman 394 N.W.2d 620 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
See Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174, 177
Kiess v. Hamann 369 N.W.2d 551 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Kiess v. Hamann 369 N.W.2d 551 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
See Thomas v. Mrkonich, 247 Minn. 481, 485 , Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174, 182
McCuen v. McCarvel 263 N.W.2d 64 Minn. 1978
McCuen v. McCarvel 263 N.W.2d 64 Minn. 1978
Burns v. Plachecki, 301 Minn. 445 , Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174
Rice v. Miller 238 N.W.2d 609 Minn. 1976
Rice v. Miller 238 N.W.2d 609 Minn. 1976
Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174
Burns v. Plachecki 223 N.W.2d 133 Minn. 1974
Burns v. Plachecki 223 N.W.2d 133 Minn. 1974
Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174
Quist v. Fuller 220 N.W.2d 296 Minn. 1974
Quist v. Fuller 220 N.W.2d 296 Minn. 1974
s continuously as a public highway, the same shall be deemed dedicated to the public to the width of two rods on each side of the center line thereof and be and remain, until lawfully vacated, a public highway whether the same has ever been established as a public highway or not; * * Further, this court has set forth the elements necessary to establish a prescriptive easement in Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174, 177 , : “* * * We construe the word prescription * * * to mean adverse possession.
Iverson v. Fjoslien 213 N.W.2d 627 Minn. 1973
Iverson v. Fjoslien 213 N.W.2d 627 Minn. 1973
In Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174, 177 , we set out the necessary conditions for the granting of a prescriptive easement: “* * * We construe the word prescription * * * to mean adverse possession.
Hartman v. Blanding's Inc. 181 N.W.2d 466 Minn. 1970
Hartman v. Blanding's Inc. 181 N.W.2d 466 Minn. 1970
The true owner’s rights must be invaded by such hostile acts as would constitute grounds for action against the adverse claimant or intruder, and under such circumstances as to make the possession appear to be for the benefit of the claimant.” Defendant relies primarily upon Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174, 178 , 14 N. W. (2d) 482, 485 , in which this court stated: “Occasional and sporadic trespasses for temporary purposes, because they do not indicate permanent occupation and appropriation of l
Farnes v. Freeman Lane 161 N.W.2d 297 Minn. 1968
Farnes v. Freeman Lane 161 N.W.2d 297 Minn. 1968
2 Romans v. Nadler, 217 Minn. 174 , 14 N. W. (2d) 482 ; Alvin v. Johnson, 241 Minn. 257 , 63 N. W. (2d) 22 ; Polebitski v. John Week Lbr.
Hanson v. Fergus Falls National Bank & Trust Co. 65 N.W.2d 857 Minn. 1954