Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Winston v. Johnson, 45 N.W. 958.

23 citing documents.

Robert Jensen, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
It involves “two distinct tenements”—“the dominant, to which the right belongs, and the servient, upon which the burden or obliga tion rests.” Winston v. Johnson
Ellen Kalahar-Grissom, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Co., 21 F.2d 388, 393 (8th Cir. 1927) (“A grantor of land may, by an exception or reservation, in his deed, create an easement in the land granted for the benefit of his remaining land.” (citations omitted)) ; (“Where it appears .
Castor v. City of Minneapolis 429 N.W.2d 244 Minn. 1988
Neill v. Hake 93 N.W.2d 821 Minn. 1958
Neill v. Hake 93 N.W.2d 821 Minn. 1958
Alvin v. Johnson, 241 Minn. 257 , 63 N. W. (2d) 22 ; Winston v. Johnson, 42 Minn. 398 , ; 17A Am.
Alvin v. Johnson 63 N.W.2d 22 Minn. 1954
Alvin v. Johnson 63 N.W.2d 22 Minn. 1954
In Winston v. Johnson, 42 Minn. 398, 404 , , the same claim was made, namely, that the owner of the easement of an alleyway should have protected his interest by a payment of taxes against the alleyway.
Romanchuk v. Plotkin 9 N.W.2d 421 Minn. 1943
Romanchuk v. Plotkin 9 N.W.2d 421 Minn. 1943
Winston v. Johnson, 42 Minn. 398 , .
Ingelson v. Olson 272 N.W. 270 Minn. 1937
Ingelson v. Olson 272 N.W. 270 Minn. 1937
Winston v. Johnson, 42 Minn. 398 , ; Lidgerding v. Zignego, 77 Minn. 421 , , 77 A. S. R. 677.
Aldrich v. Soucheray 158 N.W. 637 Minn. 1916
Aldrich v. Soucheray 158 N.W. 637 Minn. 1916
Co. v. Duncan, 87 Minn. 91 , ; Winston v. Johnson, 42 Minn. 398 , .
Kretz v. Fireproof Storage Co. 149 N.W. 648 Minn. 1914
Kretz v. Fireproof Storage Co. 149 N.W. 648 Minn. 1914
Winston v. Johnson, 42 Minn. 398 , ; Lidgerding v. Zignego, 77 Minn. 421 , ; 77 Am.
Endicott v. Davidson 142 N.W. 805 Minn. 1913
Endicott v. Davidson 142 N.W. 805 Minn. 1913
Winston v. Johnson, 42 Minn. 398, 404 , , is in point, as is also *415 Stansell v. American Radiator Co. 163 Mich.
Brodie v. State 113 N.W. 2 Minn. 1907
Brodie v. State 113 N.W. 2 Minn. 1907
See G. S. 1894, § 1599; Branham v. Bezanson, 33 Minn. 49 , ; Winston v. Johnson, 42 Minn. 398, 404 , ; and Washington L. & T. Co. v. McKenzie, 64 Minn. 273, 275 , .
Thompson v. Germania Life Insurance 106 N.W. 102 Minn. 1906
Thompson v. Germania Life Insurance 106 N.W. 102 Minn. 1906
pp. *29, *161; Winston v. Johnson, 42 Minn. 398, 402 , ).
Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. Duncan 91 N.W. 271 Minn. 1902
Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. Duncan 91 N.W. 271 Minn. 1902
The case is very similar to Winston v. Johnson, 42 Minn. 398 , , and controls the question.