Legal Opinion

Kottschade v. City of Rochester

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided February 10, 2009No. A08-0143Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

STAUBER, Judge.

On appeal from the district court’s summary judgment that appellant-developer’s complaint alleging a regulatory taking by respondenGcity was filed beyond the limitations period, appellant argues that (1) under the finality doctrine of Williamson County Reg'l Planning Comm’n v. Hamilton Bank, 473 U.S. 172, 105 S.Ct. 3108, 87 L.Ed.2d 126 (1985), and its progeny, appellant’s complaint was timely because his claim was not ripe until after final administrative review of the denial of his variance application and (2) the record does not support the district court’s…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Weinstein v. BradfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  4. Dolan v. City of TigardSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  5. Palazzolo v. Rhode IslandSupreme Court of the United States · 2001

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

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

Powered by the Exa API