Legal Opinion · Dissent

Castor v. City of Minneapolis

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided September 23, 1988No. C3-87-1036Published

1DissentWahl, Justice

I respectfully dissent. Under the law of this state and the facts of this case I find the public skyway above the public alley to be a proper street use which creates no additional servitude upon petitioners’ implied easements for light, air and view. A taking can be found only where an additional servitude is placed upon this implied easement by an improper street use. Haeussler v. Braun, 314 N.W.2d 4, 8 (Minn.1981).

While the implied easements for light, air and view are a limited interest in property, possessed by the abutting landowners, they are, as the city notes, subservient to the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Sauer v. City of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
  2. Cater v. Northwestern Telephone Exchange Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
  3. Minneapolis Gas Co. v. ZimmermanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1958
  4. Carli v. Stillwater Street Railway & Transfer Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1881
  5. Winston v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890

7 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