Legal Opinion
Chaney v. Minneapolis Community Development Agency
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided March 26, 2002No. C3-01-1349, C1-01-1401PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
G. BARRY ANDERSON, Judge.
Respondents, the City of Minneapolis and the Minneapolis Community Development Agency et al. (MCDA), published a request for proposals (RFP) inviting bids to rehabilitate certain property located in Minneapolis. Appellants, Michael and Robert Chaney, submitted a bid. Respondents did not sell the property to appellants but sold it to intervenor, Gesco, Inc. 1 On the same day respondents conveyed the property to intervenor, appellants brought suit claiming, inter alia, racial discrimination and breach of contract. Appellants filed and recorded a notice of lis…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Brookfield Trade Center, Inc. v. County of RamseySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
- Fletcher v. St. Paul Pioneer PressSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
- Matter of SchmidtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- Vangsness v. VangsnessCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2000
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Weddell v. H2O, INC.Nevada Supreme Court · 2012
- Lindquist v. Household Industrial Finance Co. (In Re Vondall)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Eighth Circuit · 2007
- Lathrop v. SakataniHawaii Supreme Court · 2006
- Seaver v. New Buffalo Auto Sales, LLC (In Re Hecker)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Eighth Circuit · 2011
- Mavco, Inc. v. EgginkSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.