Legal Opinion

Middlemist v. City of Plymouth

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided May 13, 1986No. C4-85-1946PublishedCited by 1 opinion

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

  1. ASSOCIATED HOME BUILDERS ETC. v. City of Walnut CreekCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Jordan v. Village of Menomonee FallsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Pioneer Trust & Savings Bank v. Village of Mount ProspectIllinois Supreme Court · 1961
  4. Collis v. City of BloomingtonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
  5. State Ex Rel. Spannaus v. HopfSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Kottschade v. City of RochesterCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1995

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

Powered by the Exa API