Legal Opinion
City of Edina v. Dreher
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided April 24, 1990No. C7-89-1920PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
RANDALL, Judge.
This is an appeal from judgment against appellant for violating a city ordinance that prohibits a person from keeping an animal which by any noise disturbs the peace and quiet of persons in the vicinity. Appellant argues that the city ordinance denies him due process of law. We reverse.
FACTS
On August 14,1989, an Edina community officer was dispatched by the police department to answer a citizen’s complaint that a dog was barking at the house of appellant Roger Dreher. Upon reaching the house, the officer sat in his vehicle and from about 50 yards away listened to…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Kolender v. LawsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Coates v. City of CincinnatiSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- State v. NewstromSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
- State v. BeckerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
- City of Spokane v. FischerWashington Supreme Court · 1988
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Town of Baldwin v. CarterSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2002
- State v. SingerCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1997
- Press v. City of MinneapolisCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1996
- State v. RehaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1991
- State v. FriedmanNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1997