Legal Opinion
Jadwin v. City of Dayton
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided December 24, 1985No. C3-85-1436PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LANSING, Judge.
This appeal is from a default judgment in favor of respondents James and Mary Jo Jadwin. The trial court struck appellants’ answer and entered judgment for respondents under Minn.R.Civ.P. 37.02. We reverse.
FACTS
James and Mary Jo Jadwin sued the City of Dayton, its mayor, and its council members (in both their official and individual capacities) in Hennepin County District Court. The suit arose when the city denied the Jadwins’ application to rezone their property from “agricultural” to “special agricultural.”
Of 17 applications for rezoning, the Jad-wins’ was the only one…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Firoved v. General Motors CorporationSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1967
- Kielsa v. St. John's Lutheran Hospital AssociationSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1970
- Beal v. ReinertsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
- Marriage of Sudheimer v. SudheimerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
- Housing & Redevelopment Authority of the City of Saint Paul v. KotlarCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Frontier Insurance Co. v. Frontline Processing Corp.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010