Middlemist v. City of Plymouth
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FORSBERG, Judge.
This is an appeal by the landowners from a judgment entered in an action for mandamus and inverse condemnation. The trial court on a motion for summary judgment ruled that respondent City of Plymouth was required to compensate the landowners, but declined to issue a writ of mandamus compelling the city to commence eminent domain or condemnation proceedings, and did not award appellants attorneys fees. The city has filed a petition for review of the judgment. We reverse the judgment insofar as it orders compensation to be paid by respondent.
FACTS
Appellant Robert…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- ASSOCIATED HOME BUILDERS ETC. v. City of Walnut CreekCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Jordan v. Village of Menomonee FallsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
- Pioneer Trust & Savings Bank v. Village of Mount ProspectIllinois Supreme Court · 1961
- Collis v. City of BloomingtonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
- State Ex Rel. Spannaus v. HopfSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Kottschade v. City of RochesterCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1995