Legal Opinion
Schultz v. City of Duluth
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided April 24, 1925No. 24,417PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.
The action is to .enjoin the city of Duluth from enforcing an ordinance. The Duluth Street Railway Company was permitted to intervene. Wlhen the action was begun a temporary restraining order was granted and an order made requiring the city to show cause why a temporary injunction should not issue. After a hearing the restraining order was vacated and a temporary injunction denied. Plaintiff appeals.
The title of the ordinance is: “An ordinance regulating the operation of motor vehicles carrying passengers for hire (except taxicabs, vehicles engaged in livery business and busses operating…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Packard v. BantonSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Davis v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Ex parte DickeyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1915
- Burgess v. Mayor of BrocktonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
- Winters v. City of DuluthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1901
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- The Alexander Co. v. City of OwatonnaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1946
- State v. LefebvreSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
- Long's Baggage Transfer Co. v. BurfordSupreme Court of Virginia · 1926
- Red Star Motor Drivers' Ass'n v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1926
- State v. GamelinSupreme Court of Vermont · 1940
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.