Legal Opinion

J & W Asphalt, Inc. v. Belle Plaine Township, State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided August 1, 2016No. A16-16Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

REYES, Judge.

Appellant argues that . MinmStat. § 161.16, subd. 4(b), contains an implicit acceptance requirement, and because it did not accept the conveyance of Hanlon Drive from respondent, the conveyance was, not effective, Appellant further argues that Hanlon Drive is a cartway, and the private landowners whose property abuts the road are responsible for its maintenance. Finally, appellant argues that it neither opened Hanlon. Drive nor authorized the expenditure of public funds for it, so it cannot be responsible for maintaining it. Because we conclude that MinmStat. § 161.16,…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Star Centers, Inc. v. Faegre & Benson, L.L.P.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
  2. Staab v. Diocese of St. CloudSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
  3. Christianson v. HenkeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2013
  4. Village of Newport v. TaylorSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1948
  5. Hebert v. City of Fifty LakesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2008

15 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