Legal Opinion
BFW CO. v. County of Ramsey
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided July 17, 1997No. C2-97-106PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GARDEBRING, Justice.
This is a property tax appeal that turns on a question of statutory interpretation — what is the extent of the statutory obligation imposed on a petitioner to provide information to the county within 60 days of the petition?
On April 1, 1996, relator BFW Company filed a Chapter 278 petition challenging the Ramsey County’s January 2, 1995 valuation of Crown Plaza Shopping Center in St. Paul. Minnesota Statutes section 278.05, subdivision 6(a) requires such petitioners to provide certain information to the county within 60 days of the petition’s filing, unless evidence…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States v. County of RamseySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
- Homart Development Co. v. County of HennepinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
- Land O' Lakes Dairy Co. v. Village of SebekaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1948
- Continental Sales & Equipment Co. v. Town of StuntzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Minnesota Entertainment Enterprises, Inc. v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
3Cited by19 opinions
- Kmart Corp. v. County of StearnsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2006
- Kmart Corp. v. County of BeckerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
- Irongate Enterprises Inc. v. County of St. LouisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
- Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. County of HennepinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
- Amoco Corp. v. Commissioner of RevenueSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.