Legal Opinion
Veit Co. v. Lake County
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided January 17, 2006No. A04-1958PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PETERSON, Judge.
On appeal from .the denial of relator applicants’ application to amend their conditional-use permit, relators argue that their application was approved by operation of law because respondent county did not (1) provide relators a written statement of the reasons for denying the permit within the required statutory period; and (2) provide relators a written statement of the reasons for the denial that was consistent with the reasons stated on the record. We reverse.
FACTS
In July 2000, respondent Lake County Planning Commission granted relator B & B Aggregates a…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Ging v. Board of EducationSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
- American Tower, L.P. v. City of GrantSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
- Dietz v. Dodge CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. SpaethSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
- Demolition Landfill Services, LLC v. City of DuluthCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2000
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Hans Hagen Homes, Inc. v. City of MinnetristaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2006
- Minnesota Towers, Inc. v. City of DuluthCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2007
- Hans Hagen Homes, Inc. v. City of MinnetristaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2006
- Hans Hagen Homes, Inc. v. City of MinnetristaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2006
- Minnesota Towers v. City of DuluthCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2007
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.