Legal Opinion

Henningsen v. City of Stillwater

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided October 18, 1900No. Nos. 12,210—(10)PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Washington county, Crosby, J., sustaining a demurrer to the complaint.

1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.

The rule laid down in London & N. W. A. Mort. Co. v. Gibson, 77 Minn. 394, 80 N. W. 205, disposes of this appeal. A clause found in the St. Paul city charter, limiting the period of time within which an action could be brought to question the validity of a sale of land within that municipality to satisfy a judgment for a special assessment for local improvements against it, was construed, and it was held that this limitation applied to all actions brought to set aside such a sale. In substance, the same clause is found in the charter of the city of Stillwater, in which.city the present cause…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. St. Paul Division No. 1 v. BrownSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1866
  2. London & Northwest American Mortgage Co. v. GibsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Douglas v. WestfallSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
  2. Otis v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1904
  3. Willard v. HodappSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906

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

Powered by the Exa API