Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
15 Minnesota opinions name it 2 courts 1972–2015 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Minnesota courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Enderson v. Kelehangreen2 sentences2014The reasonable-use doctrine balances the benefits “to the land drained” with the harms to the neighboring property “receiving the burden.” Enderson v. Kelehan, 226 Minn. 163, 168 , 32 N.W.2d 286, 289 (1948). 2014The reasonable-use doctrine balances the benefits “to the land drained” with the harms to the neighboring property “receiving the burden.” Enderson v. Kelehan, 226 Minn. 163, 168 , 32 N.W.2d 286, 289 (1948). | 4 | 5 |
Pell v. Nelsongreen2 sentences2015See Pell v. Nelson, 294 Minn. 363, 366-67 , 201 N.W.2d 136, 138-39 (1972) (holding that reasonable-use test applied to trespass actions involving the direct intrusion of surface waters on plaintiff’s land). “‘Surface waters’ consist of waters from rain, springs, or melting snow which lie or flow on the surface of the earth, but which do not form part of a well-defined body of water or natural watercourse.” Enderson v. Kelehan, 226 Minn. 163, 167 , 32 N.W.2d 286, 289-90 (1948). 2015See Pell v. Nelson, 294 Minn. 363, 366-67 , 201 N.W.2d 136, 138-39 (1972) (holding that reasonable-use test applied to trespass actions involving the direct intrusion of surface waters on plaintiff’s land). “‘Surface waters’ consist of waters from rain, springs, or melting snow which lie or flow on the surface of the earth, but which do not form part of a well-defined body of water or natural watercourse.” Enderson v. Kelehan, 226 Minn. 163, 167 , 32 N.W.2d 286, 289-90 (1948). | 3 | 3 |
Highview North Apartments v. County of Ramseygreen2 sentences2015See id. (“In a case where the plaintiff had chosen to sue in negligence for harm caused by a diversion of surface water, . . . we nevertheless analyzed the liability on appeal in terms of the reasonable use test.”). 2015Highview N. Apartments v. Ramsey Cnty., 323 N.W.2d 65, 71 (Minn. 1982). “‘Reasonable use’ . . . is a different theory than ‘reasonable care,’ a negligence concept.” Wilson v. Ramacher, 352 N.W.2d 389, 393 (Minn. 1984). “‘[R]easonable use’ refers rather to a reasonable regard for the rights of others so that harm may be prevented or minimized.” Highview, 323 N.W.2d at 72 . | 2 | 3 |
Duevel v. Jennissengreen2 sentences2015Victor does not directly challenge the district court’s finding that filling in the swale and grassway was reasonably necessary because it “improved farming efficiency and production” and “reduced erosion.” And this court has previously upheld a district court’s determination that drainage that improves crop output is reasonably necessary, Goerke, 857 N.W.2d at 56 , and that installing a drainage system that significantly increased tillable land was permissible under the reasonable-use doctrine, Duevel, 352 N.W.2d at 96-97 . 2015What is reasonable use is a fact question to be resolved according to the peculiar facts of each case.” Duevel v. Jennissen, 352 N.W.2d 93, 96 (Minn. App. 1984). | 2 | 3 |
Kral v. Boeschgreen2 sentences2015Kral, 557 N.W.2d at 599 (quotation omitted). 2014Kral v. Boesch, 557 N.W.2d 597, 598-99 (Minn.App.1996). | 2 | 2 |
Matter v. Nelsongreen2 sentences2015The conditions include 1) there is a reasonable necessity for the drainage; 2) care is taken to avoid unnecessary injury to the burdened land; 3) the utility or benefit accruing to the drained land outweighs the gravity of the harm resulting to the burdened land; and 4) the drainage is accomplished by reasonably improving and aiding the natural drainage system, or if, in the absence of a practical natural drain, a reasonable and feasible artificial drainage system is adopted. 8 Id. 2015Under the reasonable-use doctrine, “if certain conditions are met, a landowner acting in good faith has the right to drain surface water and cast the water upon the burdened land of a neighbor.” Matter, 478 N.W.2d at 214 . | 1 | 2 |
Goerke Family Partnership, Donald Shelstad v. Lac qui Parle-Yellow Bank Watershed District, William Croattgreen2 sentences2015Victor does not directly challenge the district court’s finding that filling in the swale and grassway was reasonably necessary because it “improved farming efficiency and production” and “reduced erosion.” And this court has previously upheld a district court’s determination that drainage that improves crop output is reasonably necessary, Goerke, 857 N.W.2d at 56 , and that installing a drainage system that significantly increased tillable land was permissible under the reasonable-use doctrine, Duevel, 352 N.W.2d at 96-97 . 2015Minnesota has adopted the reasonable-use doctrine which “permits a property owner to drain surface waters onto another’s land if the elements of the reasonable-use doctrine are met.” Goerke Family P’ship v. Lac qui Parle-Yellow Bank Watershed Dist., 857 N.W.2d 50, 54 (Minn. App. 2014). | 1 | 1 |
Wilson v. Ramachergreen1 sentence2015Highview N. Apartments v. Ramsey Cnty., 323 N.W.2d 65, 71 (Minn. 1982). “‘Reasonable use’ . . . is a different theory than ‘reasonable care,’ a negligence concept.” Wilson v. Ramacher, 352 N.W.2d 389, 393 (Minn. 1984). “‘[R]easonable use’ refers rather to a reasonable regard for the rights of others so that harm may be prevented or minimized.” Highview, 323 N.W.2d at 72 . | 1 | 1 |
Town of King v. Brekkegreen2 sentences2015In Town of King v. Brekke, the defendant built a dike that caused the flooding of a highway bridge that crossed a natural water-carrying depression. 151 Minn. 474, 475 , 187 N.W. 515, 515 (1922). 2015In Town of King v. Brekke, the defendant built a dike that caused the flooding of a highway bridge that crossed a natural water-carrying depression. 151 Minn. 474, 475 , 187 N.W. 515, 515 (1922). | 1 | 1 |
Johnson v. Agerbeckgreen2 sentences1989See e.g., Kallevig v. Holmgren, 293 Minn. 193, 197-98 , 197 N.W.2d 714, 718 (Minn.1972); Johnson v. Agerbeck, 247 Minn. 432, 437-38 , 77 N.W.2d 539, 543 (1956); Enderson , 226 Minn, at 167-68, 32 N.W.2d at 289 ; Duevel v. Jennissen, 352 N.W.2d 93, 96 (Minn.Ct.App.1984). 1989See e.g., Kallevig v. Holmgren, 293 Minn. 193, 197-98 , 197 N.W.2d 714, 718 (Minn.1972); Johnson v. Agerbeck, 247 Minn. 432, 437-38 , 77 N.W.2d 539, 543 (1956); Enderson , 226 Minn, at 167-68, 32 N.W.2d at 289 ; Duevel v. Jennissen, 352 N.W.2d 93, 96 (Minn.Ct.App.1984). | 1 | 1 |
Kallevig v. Holmgrengreen2 sentences1989See e.g., Kallevig v. Holmgren, 293 Minn. 193, 197-98 , 197 N.W.2d 714, 718 (Minn.1972); Johnson v. Agerbeck, 247 Minn. 432, 437-38 , 77 N.W.2d 539, 543 (1956); Enderson , 226 Minn, at 167-68, 32 N.W.2d at 289 ; Duevel v. Jennissen, 352 N.W.2d 93, 96 (Minn.Ct.App.1984). 1989See e.g., Kallevig v. Holmgren, 293 Minn. 193, 197-98 , 197 N.W.2d 714, 718 (Minn.1972); Johnson v. Agerbeck, 247 Minn. 432, 437-38 , 77 N.W.2d 539, 543 (1956); Enderson , 226 Minn, at 167-68, 32 N.W.2d at 289 ; Duevel v. Jennissen, 352 N.W.2d 93, 96 (Minn.Ct.App.1984). | 1 | 1 |
Spaeth v. City of Plymouthgreen1 sentence1984See Spaeth v. City of Plymouth, 344 N.W.2d 815 (Minn.1984). | 1 | 1 |
Greenwood v. Evergreen Mines Co.green2 sentences1984Greenwood v. Evergreen Mines Co., 220 Minn. 296, 312 , 19 N.W.2d 726, 734-35 (1945). 7 . 1984Greenwood v. Evergreen Mines Co., 220 Minn. 296, 312 , 19 N.W.2d 726, 734-35 (1945). 7 . | 1 | 1 |
Nelson v. Wilsongreen2 sentences1982See also Nelson v. Wilson, 239 Minn. 164 , 58 N.W.2d 330 (1953), where the reasonable use test was applied to a claim that a “negligent trespass” amounted to a taking. 1982See also Nelson v. Wilson, 239 Minn. 164 , 58 N.W.2d 330 (1953), where the reasonable use test was applied to a claim that a “negligent trespass” amounted to a taking. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Minnesota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Sheehan v. Flynn
green
2 sentences1991The reasonable use doctrine says that, if certain conditions are met, a landowner acting in good faith has the right to drain surface water and cast the water upon the burdened land of a neighbor. 1 See Sheehan, 59 Minn. at 442-43 , 61 N.W. at 463 . 1991The reasonable use doctrine says that, if certain conditions are met, a landowner acting in good faith has the right to drain surface water and cast the water upon the burdened land of a neighbor. 1 See Sheehan, 59 Minn. at 442-43 , 61 N.W. at 463 . | 2 | 1972–1991 |
Evers v. Willaby
green
2 sentences1996Evers, 444 N.W.2d at 860 . 1996Evers, 444 N.W.2d at 860 . | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Will v. Boler
green
2 sentences1982See Pell v. Nelson, 294 Minn. 363 , 201 N.W.2d 136 (1972) (an unreasonable diversion of surface waters off defendant’s farmland); Will v. Boler, 212 Minn. 525 , 4 N.W.2d 345 (1942) (damming a swale not a reasonable use). 1982See Pell v. Nelson, 294 Minn. 363 , 201 N.W.2d 136 (1972) (an unreasonable diversion of surface waters off defendant’s farmland); Will v. Boler, 212 Minn. 525 , 4 N.W.2d 345 (1942) (damming a swale not a reasonable use). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Bush v. City of Rochester
green
2 sentences1982Bush v. City of Rochester, 191 Minn. 591 , 255 N.W. 256 (1934). 1982Bush v. City of Rochester, 191 Minn. 591 , 255 N.W. 256 (1934). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Kall v. Carruthers
green
2 sentences1982Deyo v. Athol Housing Authority, 335 Mass. 459 , 140 N.E.2d 393 (1957); Kall v. Carruthers, 59 Cal.App. 555 , 211 P. 43 (1922). 1982Deyo v. Athol Housing Authority, 335 Mass. 459 , 140 N.E.2d 393 (1957); Kall v. Carruthers, 59 Cal.App. 555 , 211 P. 43 (1922). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Crookston Cattle Co. v. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
green
1 sentence1982And see also Crookston Cattle Co. v. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 300 N.W.2d 769 , 774 n. 3 (1980) (dictum that reasonable use test may apply with respect to using underground waters). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Deyo v. Athol Housing Authority
green
2 sentences1982Deyo v. Athol Housing Authority, 335 Mass. 459 , 140 N.E.2d 393 (1957); Kall v. Carruthers, 59 Cal.App. 555 , 211 P. 43 (1922). 1982Deyo v. Athol Housing Authority, 335 Mass. 459 , 140 N.E.2d 393 (1957); Kall v. Carruthers, 59 Cal.App. 555 , 211 P. 43 (1922). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Petraborg v. Zontelli
green
2 sentences1980Petraborg v. Zontelli, 217 Minn. 536 , 15 N.W.2d 174 (1944). 1980Petraborg v. Zontelli, 217 Minn. 536 , 15 N.W.2d 174 (1944). | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Sachs v. Chiat
green
2 sentences1973The trial court, applying the reasonable-use rule, Sachs v. Chiat, 281 Minn. 540 , 162 N. W. 2d 243 (1968), found that defendant acted reasonably in designing and constructing this system, and ordered judgment for defendant. 1973The trial court, applying the reasonable-use rule, Sachs v. Chiat, 281 Minn. 540 , 162 N. W. 2d 243 (1968), found that defendant acted reasonably in designing and constructing this system, and ordered judgment for defendant. | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.