AVR, INC. v. City of St. Louis Park
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WILLIS, Judge.
Appellant AVR, Inc., challenges the district court’s order granting summary judgment to respondent City of St. Louis Park, claiming that the city’s zoning ordinance that establishes a two-year amortization period for appellant’s preexisting nonconforming use is unreasonable and violates appellant’s right to equal protection of the laws. We affirm.
FACTS
AVR owns and operates a ready-mix concrete plant in the City of St. Louis Park. The plant was constructed in 1954. In 1959, the city passed a zoning ordinance permitting ready-mix plants in the area of the city zoned for…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Thiele v. StichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Honn v. City of Coon RapidsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
- City of University Park v. BennersTexas Supreme Court · 1972
- Wartnick v. Moss & BarnettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
- State Ex Rel. Beaulieu v. City of Mounds ViewSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1994
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- KOB-TV, L.L.C. v. City of AlbuquerqueNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2005
- Suffolk Asphalt Supply, Inc. v. Board of TrusteesNew York Supreme Court · 2016