City of Duluth v. Orr
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for St. Louis county, Ensign, Cant, Dibell, and Hughes, JJ., affirming a judgment of the municipal court of Duluth, wherein he was found guilty of the violation of a city ordinance relative to storing explosives within one mile of and outside the limits of the city of Duluth. The facts were stipulated.
1Opinion of the CourtSimpson, J.
In February, 1900, the citizens of Duluth adopted a charter under the authority of section 36, art. 4, of the Constitution, permitting a city “to frame a charter for its own government as a city consistent with and subject to the laws of this state,” and of the laws of the state passed pursuant to this constitutional provision. Chapter 351, p. 462, Laws 1899; sections 748-758, R. L. 1905. Under these statutes a city is authorized “to frame a city charter for its own government,” and it is further provided: “Subject to the limitations in this chapter provided, it may provide for any scheme of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Rose v. HimelySupreme Court of the United States · 1808
- Grant v. BerrisfordSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1904
- State ex rel. Getchell v. O'connorSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
- State ex rel. Barber Asphalt Paving Co. v. District CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
- State ex rel. Ryan v. District Court of Ramsey CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
3Cited by8 opinions
- City of Riverview v. Sibley LimestoneMichigan Court of Appeals · 2006
- State v. LarsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1972
- Town of Burnsville v. City of BloomingtonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1964
- Almquist v. City of BiwabikSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1947
- State ex rel. Smith v. City of International FallsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.