Anderson v. City of St. Paul
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Dissent
I find myself in disagreement with the result reached by the majority. As I view the record and the contentions of counsel, the important question presented is not the constitutional question so elaborately treated in the majority opinion, but the question whether, as distinguished from the constitutional problem, the ordinance is unreasonable, oppressive, and discriminatory, a question touched upon but lightly by the majority and wholly ignored by the brief of defendants, although it was discussed at considerable length by both counsel upon the oral argument. Plaintiff definitely raised the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Evison v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
- Fitzpatrick v. Liquor Control CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1946
- Sverkerson v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1939
- Nelson v. State Ex Rel. GrossSupreme Court of Florida · 1946
- City of Shreveport v. Shreveport Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1930
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Anderson v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1948