Legal Opinion

Gilliland v. PORT AUTH. OF CITY OF ST. PAUL

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 16, 1978No. 48560PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Per curiam

Twenty-two tenants and former tenants of the Capri Hotel in St. Paul seek to enjoin construction activity at the Capri and to halt threatened evictions until their claims to relocation assistance under the Minnesota Uniform Relocation Act (“M.U. R.A.”), Minn.St. 117.50, et seq., can be judicially determined.1 They appeal from the order of the Ramsey County District Court of January 25, 1978, denying their motion for injunctive relief. Because of our concern over the problem presented, we expedited the appeal, and heard and considered the case en banc. Even so, appellant tenants concede that…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Helvering v. San Joaquin Fruit & Investment Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
  2. Shaffer v. Brooklyn Park Garden ApartmentsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
  3. Land O' Lakes Dairy Co. v. County of WadenaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1949
  4. Albright v. HenrySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1970
  5. Clarno v. Gamble-Robinson Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1933

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Contested Cases of St. Otto's Home v. Minnesota Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
  2. Port Authority of St. Paul v. HarstadCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1995
  3. In Re Relocation Benefits of James Bros. Furniture, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2002
  4. In Re WrenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2005
  5. In Re WrenCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004

4 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