Legal Opinion · Dissent

Countryside Village v. City of North Branch

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided November 16, 1988No. CX-88-1125Published

1DissentNierengarten, Judge

I dissent because I believe North Branch complied with all relevant procedural requirements of Minn.Stat. §§ 429.031-.081 (1986) as those requirements reasonably pertain to ad valorem taxes levied under Minn.Stat. §§ 444.18, 444.20 (1986). Countryside asserts North Branch did not notify Countryside of its right to appeal to the district court under section 429.081. I be*209lieve the notice given was sufficient and that notice of appeal under section 429.081 was unnecessary under the circumstances.

The legislature authorized local governments to establish special storm sewer improvement tax…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. Roselawn Cemetery Assn.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1961
  2. Peterson v. City of Inver Grove HeightsCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API