Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Hans Hagen Homes, Inc. v. City of Minnetrista

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided May 16, 2006No. A05-1686Published

1ConcurrenceRandall, Judge

(concurring specially)-

The court today correctly interprets the express language of Minn.Stat. § 15.99 (2004). Today’s decision represents the present legislative intent of section 15.99, which requires municipalities to provide written notice of a decision to the petitioning party within (a strict) 60 days. Am. Tower v. City of Grant, 636 N.W.2d 309,' 313 (Minn.2001), Veit Co. v. Lake County, 707 N.W.2d 725, 728-29 (Minn.App.2006), review denied (Minn. Apr. 18, 2006). Today’s finding is in accordance with the plain language of section 15.99. I write separately to underscore the inherent…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Elwood v. County of RiceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
  2. Rico v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1991
  3. Nusbaum v. County of Blue EarthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
  4. American Tower, L.P. v. City of GrantSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
  5. Cook v. TrovattenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1937

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API