Legal Opinion
Programmed Land, Inc. v. O'CONNOR
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided December 7, 1999No. CX-99-777, C7-99-1210PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
RANDALL, Judge.
These consolidated cases are based on the miscalculation of property taxes by both Hennepin and Dakota Counties and the subsequent overpayment of taxes by owners of commercial and industrial properties. Hennepin County was denied summary judgment by the district court. In Dakota County, the case went to trial on stipulated facts, and the property owner was awarded judgment. Both counties appeal and argue that: (1) Minnesota Statutes chapter 278 provides the exclusive remedy by which property owners can recover overpayments; and (2) the statute of limitations for this…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Harper v. Virginia Department of TaxationSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Thiele v. StichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- McKesson Corp. v. Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, Fla. Dept. of Business RegulationSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Frost-Benco Electric Ass'n v. Minnesota Public Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
- In Re HaggertySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Programmed Land, Inc. v. O'CONNORSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
- Programmed Land, Inc. v. O'CONNORSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
- Programmed Land, Inc. v. O'CONNORCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1999