Legal Opinion

Vacation of Part of Town of Hibbing

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 19, 1925No. 23,730PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Reported in 204 N.W. 534, 205 N.W. 613. The owners of the land embraced in the plat of the townsite of the village of Hibbing, commonly known as the north forty, applied to the district court of St. Louis county for the vacation of the plat. The application was granted and property owners in Pillsbury and Southern additions, which lie south of and adjacent to the plat vacated, have appealed from the judgment and from an order denying their motion to set it aside and dismiss the proceeding for want of jurisdiction.

For a statement of many of the pertinent facts, we refer to Reed v. Village of…

2Cases cited49 opinions

  1. Austin v. Augusta Terminal Railway Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1899
  2. Brakken v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1881
  3. City of East St. Louis v. O'FlynnIllinois Supreme Court · 1887
  4. Stanwood v. City of MaldenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
  5. Tilly v. Mitchell & Lewis Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1904

44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. Bacich v. Board of ControlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  2. DuPuy v. City of WacoTexas Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Hendrickson v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1964
  4. Wegner v. Milwaukee Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1991
  5. City of Crookston v. EricksonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955

35 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