State ex rel. Hilton v. Village of Kinney
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Upon the relation of Clifford L. Hilton, Attorney General, the supreme court granted its writ of quo warranto directed to the village of Kinney and its officers and trustees to determine the legality of the annexation of certain territory to that village.
1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.
Quo warranto in this court to determine the legality of the annexation of certain territory to the village of Kinney in St. Louis county. The village, as originally incorporated, embraced only one forty, the platted portion being located within the north 20 acres thereof. By two successive annexations 1,140 acres were added, and by the one now questioned the village territory was again increased by 1,560 acres or 39 forties. Thirty-five of these forties did not have a single inhabitant, the other four contained a population of 108 persons, only ten of whom were legal voters. At the time the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Oelschlegel v. Chicago Great Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
- State ex rel. Childs v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
- State ex rel. Simpson v. Village of DoverSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911
- State ex rel. Young v. Village of KentSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1905
- State ex rel. Simpson v. Village of AliceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Danielson v. Village of MoundSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1951
- State ex rel. Hilton v. City of NashwaukSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
- Boise City v. Boise City Development Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1925
- State ex rel. Hilton v. Village of BuhlSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1921
- State Ex Rel. Burnquist v. Village of LeetoniaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.