Laserfiche WebLink
9 <br />to be a non-discretionary duty to have fence viewers view the fence. See Minn. St at. <br />§ 344.17 (“A fence viewer who unreasonably fails to perform a duty required by this <br />chapter shall forfeit $5 to the town or city and be liable to the injured party for all <br />resulting damages.”). However, neither of these other legal remedies nor anything in the <br />partition fence law allows appellant to take unilateral action without complying with <br />applicable legal procedures first. <br />D E C I S I O N <br />Because appellant failed to show that respondents’ fence is a partition fence within <br />the meaning of the partition fence statute, and because appellant has no independent right <br />to repair respondents’ fence even if it were a partition fence, the district court’s judgment <br />is not erroneous. <br />Affirmed.