Legal Opinion · Dissent

Kaufman v. County of Swift

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 12, 1947No. 34,449Published

1DissentPeterson, Justice

I think that entering into the agreement between the county and the city and then acting jointly under the agreement are by the terms of the statute conditions precedent to the issuance by the county of any bonds for the purposes mentioned or taking any steps for that purpose.

The statutory and charter provisions cited in the majority opinion authorize the county and the city separately to provide for a county and a city hospital respectively. There is no statutory provision authorizing the county to provide a city hospital nor any charter provision authorizing the city to provide a county…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Board of Courthouse & City Hall Com'rs v. CooleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
  2. Borough of Henderson v. County of SibleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1881
  3. White v. City of ChatfieldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911
  4. Kempien v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
  5. Rogers v. Le Sueur CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894

2 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