LANPHER v. NYGARD

No. A12-1419.

829 N.W.2d 438 (2013)

Peter H. LANPHER, et al., Respondents, v. Jay T. NYGARD, Appellant, Kendall M. Nygard, Defendant.

Court of Appeals of Minnesota.

April 22, 2013.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mark A. Lund , James A. Heuer, Jr. , Heuer, Lund & Flores, P.A., Minneapolis, MN, for respondents.

Jay T. Nygard, Orono, MN, pro se appellant.

Considered and decided by HOOTEN, Presiding Judge; CLEARY, Judge; and SMITH, Judge.


OPINION

HOOTEN, Judge.

Appellant argues that the district court erred by holding that a fence that is located on respondents' property but that runs along the property line with appellant's property, is not a partition fence. Appellant further argues that, because the fence is a partition fence, applicable law affords him the legal right to unilaterally paint and repair the fence without respondents' consent or knowledge. Because appellant failed to show...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases