Legal Opinion
State, by Spannaus v. Lloyd A. Fry Roof. Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided October 22, 1976No. 46116PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Todd, Justice.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (PCA), as part of extended administrative and court proceedings concerning defendant, Lloyd A. Fry Roofing Company (Fry), issued an order directing Fry to conduct stack emission tests on emissions generated at its plant in Minneapolis. Fry did not seek direct judicial review of the validity of the order but refused to conduct the specified tests. The state then brought an action in which, among other things, it sought an injunction compelling Fry to conduct the tests. The district court refused to grant such an injunction on the ground that…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- St. Regis Paper Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- State Ex Rel. Spurck v. Civil Service BoardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1948
- Martin v. WolfsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
- State Ex Rel. Ludwig v. City of BemidjiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1973
3Cited by9 opinions
- Minnesota-Dakotas Retail Hardware Ass'n v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
- Hirsch v. Bartley-Lindsay Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
- Can Manufacturers Institute, Inc. v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
- In Re 1994 & 1995 Shoreline Improvement Contractor Licenses of Landview Landscaping, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1996
- State ex rel. Ulland v. International Ass'n of Entrepreneurs of AmericaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1995
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.