Legal Opinion

Crescent Oil Co. v. City of Minneapolis

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 27, 1928No. 26,955PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDibell, J.

This is an action permanently to enjoin the defendant city of Minneapolis and its officers from enforcing an ordinance of the city requiring licenses of gasolene filling stations located on private property and imposing a fee for their issuance. The plaintiff applied for a temporary injunction. It was denied. It appeals from the order denying it.

There are two questions:(1) Whether there is charter authority for the ordinance.(2) Whether the ordinance is valid as a proper regulation in the exercise of the police power or in effect imposes a tax and is therefore invalid.

Section 5 of c. IV of…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State v. DirnbergerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
  2. State v. SugarmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
  3. State v. Amor & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
  4. Meyers v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
  5. Standard Oil Co. v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Mangold Midwest Co. v. Village of RichfieldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1966
  2. Sverkerson v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1939
  3. State v. MorrowSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
  4. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1949
  5. State Ex Rel. Remick v. ClousingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1939

9 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