Cited by

191 ; Peters v. Town of Fergus Falls, 35 Minn. 549 , 29 N.W.

In Peters v. Town of Fergus Falls, 35 Minn. 549 , , this is directly and unequivocally so determined.

Peters v. Town of Fergus Falls, 35 Minn. 549 , .

In support of their contention that the county is liable, counsel for appellant cite Peters v. Town of Fergus Falls, 35 Minn. 549 , , where it was said that the duty imposed upon a town of constructing and keeping highways in repair puts the town in possession thereof for those purposes and gives it a qualified or special property in the land over which highways run.

Nobs v. City of Minneapolis, 22 Minn. 159 ; Peters v. Town of Fergus Falls, 35 Minn. 549 , ; Oftelie v. Town of Hammond, 78 Minn. 275 , ; Gunnerus v. Town of Spring Prairie, 91 Minn. 473 , ; Halvorson v. Town of Moranville, 137 Minn. 349 , *132 ; Kiefer v. County of Ramsey, 140 Minn. 143 , .

Peters v. Town of Fergus Falls, 35 Minn. 549 , ; Schussler v. Board of Co. Commrs.

It is thoroughly settled law in this state that towns are not liable for injuries resulting from defects in the public highways, whether such defects arise from the nonfeasance or misfeasance of the township officers, except perhaps in the instances involved in Peters v. Town of Fergus Falls, 35 Minn. 549 , , as the rule of that case was explained and limited in Weltsch v. Town of Stark, 65 Minn. 5 , .

The evident purpose of the pleader was to state a cause of action within the rule laid down in Peters v. Town of Fergus Falls, 35 Minn. 549 , .

Peters v. Town of Fergus Falls, 35 Minn. 549 , .

See Peters v. Town of Fergus Falls, 35 Minn. 549 , .

It is claimed, however, on behalf of the plaintiff, that the distinction contended for was recognized and sanctioned by this court in the case of Peters v. Town of Fergus Falls, 85 Minn. 549 , .

Plaintiff’s counsel calls attention to Peters v. Town of Fergus Falls, 35 Minn. 549 , ( .)

581 ;) Peters v. Town of Fergus Falls, 35 Minn. 549 , ( 29 N. W. Rep.