Shortridge v. Daubney
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1DissentFoley, Judge
I respectfully dissent. I do not believe that the city was without jurisdiction to levy the assessment, nor do I believe that the assessment can be collaterally attacked in this manner. I would therefore reverse the trial court’s grant of summary judgment and remand for further proceedings on the malpractice action.
1. The majority’s interpretation of the doctrine of strict compliance is too simplistic and ignores the intent of the statute and the peculiar facts of this case. I do not believe that a mere informality or an immaterial defect should vitiate a notice where the error is not…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Aronovitch v. LevySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1953
- Village of Edina v. JosephSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1962
- Whipple v. MahlerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
- Appeal of Ewert v. City of WinthropSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
- Wessen v. Village of DeephavenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1969
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.