State ex rel. Hilton v. Village of Buhl
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Upon the relation.of Clifford L. Hilton, Attorney General, the supreme court granted its writ of quo warranto directed to the village of Buhl and its officers to determine the legality of the annexation of certain territory to that village.
1Opinion of the CourtDibell, J.
Quo warranto on the relation of the attorney general to determine the validity of the annexation of territory to the village of Buhl in St. Louis county.
1. The proceeding for annexation was under G. S. 1913, § 1800, et seq. It was regular. The respondents contend that since the statutory proceeding was regular there is nothing for review by the courts. We have held that section 1800 must be construed in connection with section 1204 et seq., and that the requirement of section 1204, not contained in section 1800, that the property annexed must be “so conditioned as properly to be subjected to…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- State ex rel. Simpson v. Village of DoverSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911
- State ex rel. Simpson v. Village of AliceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
- State ex rel. Hilton v. Village of KinneySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
- State ex rel. Smith v. Village of GilbertSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
3Cited by10 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Attorney General v. City of Avon ParkSupreme Court of Florida · 1933
- Town of Balkan v. Village of BuhlSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
- State Ex Rel. Danielson v. Village of MoundSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1951
- State ex rel. Hilton v. City of NashwaukSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
- Town of Burnsville v. City of BloomingtonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1964
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.