County of Lake v. Courtney
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GARDEBRING, Judge.
This is an appeal from the trial court’s judgment denying appellant’s request for injunctive relief forcing respondent to remove or move respondent’s cabin on Lake Superior. The trial court concluded respondent’s actions constituted remodeling as defined in the relevant Lake County ordinance and therefore no zoning permit or variance was required. We affirm in part, reverse in part and remand.
FACTS
Respondent James Courtney owned a one-story cabin that did not conform to the 75-foot setback requirements of the relevant Lake County zoning ordinance. The structure was…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Frost-Benco Electric Ass'n v. Minnesota Public Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
- Frank's Nursery Sales, Inc. v. City of RosevilleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- County of Freeborn v. ClaussenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1972
- Tuckner v. Township of MayCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1988
3Cited by24 opinions
- Cochrane v. Tudor Oaks Condominium ProjectCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1995
- Harford v. University of MinnesotaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1993
- Eide v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992
- Fore v. Health Dimensions, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1993
- Hunter v. Nash Finch Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1993
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.