Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite Cahill v. Eastman, 18 Minn. 324.
- Mahowald v. Minnesota Gas Co. 344 N.W.2d 856 Minn. 1984
-
Mahowald v. Minnesota Gas Co.
344 N.W.2d 856
Minn. 1984
Finally, in Cahill v. Eastman, 18 Minn. 324 (Gil.292) (1871), one who constructed a tunnel under the Mississippi River bed into which water from the river escaped and damaged plaintiffs property was held strictly liable under the doctrine of Rylands v. Fletcher.
- Simon v. Carroll 62 N.W.2d 822 Minn. 1954
- State v. Kahner 15 N.W.2d 105 Minn. 1944
- Poznanovic v. Maki 296 N.W. 415 Minn. 1941
- Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. City of Duluth 189 N.W. 937 Minn. 1922
- Kilburn v. National Surety Co. 157 N.W. 498 Minn. 1916
- Grimestad v. Lofgren 117 N.W. 515 Minn. 1908
- Swanson v. Andrus 87 N.W. 363 Minn. 1901
- State v. Barrett 41 N.W. 459 Minn. 1889
- Gregg v. Owens 33 N.W. 216 Minn. 1887
- Warner v. Lockerby 18 N.W. 145 Minn. 1884
- McCarthy v. City of St. Paul 22 Minn. 527 Minn. 1876
-
McCarthy v. City of St. Paul
22 Minn. 527
Minn. 1876
Cahill v. Eastman, 18 Minn. 324 .
- Knapheide v. Eastman 20 Minn. 478 Minn. 1874
-
Knapheide v. Eastman
20 Minn. 478
Minn. 1874
Anthony, and of a flouring mill situate thereon, and of a leasehold interest in a water power, connected with and propelling said mill, bring this action to recover damages for the destruction of the mill and power, in consequence of the excavation and construction, by the defendants, of the tunnel described in Cahill vs. Eastman, 18 Minn. 324 .