Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Murphy v. Doyle, 33 N.W. 220.

23 citing documents.

James A. Compart, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Much depends on the nature and situation of the land and the uses to which it is adapted.”); Murphy v. Doyle, 37 Minn. 113, 115, 33 N.W.
Nygren v. Patrin 179 N.W.2d 76 Minn. 1970
Nygren v. Patrin 179 N.W.2d 76 Minn. 1970
In Murphy v. Doyle, 37 Minn. 113 , , we observed that what will constitute actual adverse occupancy varies, depending upon the circumstances, and what circumstances will constitute such occupancy will depend somewhat upon the nature and situation of the property and the use to which it can be applied.
Thomas v. Mrkonich 78 N.W.2d 386 Minn. 1956
Thomas v. Mrkonich 78 N.W.2d 386 Minn. 1956
Schmidt v. Marschel, 211 Minn. 539 , 2 N. W. (2d) 121 ; Kelley v. Green, 142 Minn. 82 , ; Rupley v. Fraser, 132 Minn. 311 , ; Murphy v. Doyle, 37 Minn. 113 , .
Hanson v. Fergus Falls National Bank & Trust Co. 65 N.W.2d 857 Minn. 1954
Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Selnes 27 N.W.2d 553 Minn. 1947
Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Selnes 27 N.W.2d 553 Minn. 1947
Miesen v. Canfield, 64 Minn. 513 , ; Murphy v. Doyle, 37 Minn. 113 , .
Samels v. Samels 218 N.W. 546 Minn. 1928
Skala v. Lindbeck 214 N.W. 271 Minn. 1927
Skala v. Lindbeck 214 N.W. 271 Minn. 1927
These general observations are based largely on Murphy v. Doyle, 37 Minn. 113 , ; Costello v. Edson, 44 Minn. 135 , ; Barber v. Robinson, 78 Minn. 193 , ; Wheeler v. Gorman, 80 Minn. 462 , ; and Gaston v. May, 120 Minn. 154 , .
Beitz v. Buendiger 174 N.W. 440 Minn. 1919
Beitz v. Buendiger 174 N.W. 440 Minn. 1919
Murphy v. Doyle, 37 Minn. 113 , .
Krueger v. Market 145 N.W. 30 Minn. 1914
Krueger v. Market 145 N.W. 30 Minn. 1914
Murphy v. Doyle, 37 Minn. 113 , ; Wood v. Springer, 45 Minn. 299 , ; Young v. Grieb, 95 Minn. 396 , .
Eyre v. City of Faribault 141 N.W. 170 Minn. 1913
Eyre v. City of Faribault 141 N.W. 170 Minn. 1913
It has been considered, and when the-nature and situation of the lot and the uses to which it was adaptable-during the period of its occupancy (see Murphy v. Doyle, 37 Minn. 113 , ; Costello v. Edson, 44 Minn. 135 , )-are kept in mind, we find no difficulty in reaching the conclusion that the finding of the trial court referred to must be sustained as against the attack made thereupon by both of the parties to this action.
Markusen v. Mortensen 116 N.W. 1021 Minn. 1908
Markusen v. Mortensen 116 N.W. 1021 Minn. 1908
Murphy v. Doyle, 37 Minn. 113 , ; Brown v. Kohout, 61 Minn. 115 , .
Miesen v. Canfield 67 N.W. 632 Minn. 1896
Miesen v. Canfield 67 N.W. 632 Minn. 1896
Murphy v. Doyle, 37 Minn. 113 , .
Brown v. Kohout 63 N.W. 248 Minn. 1895
Brown v. Kohout 63 N.W. 248 Minn. 1895
It is not claimed by respondents that Kohout entered into possession of any part of the tract occupied by him under claim of title based upon any deed or other written instrument; hence the rule, as stated in the case of Murphy v. Doyle, 87 Minn. 113 , , to the effect that where a party has been in the adverse possession for the statutory period of a part of an entire tract, described in the deed under which he entered, he will be deemed to have been in the adverse possession of the whole tract,