Legal Opinion
Naegele Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. Minneapolis Community Development Agency
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided July 2, 1996No. CX-96-201PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PARKER, Judge.
Respondent Minneapolis Community Development Agency (MCDA) issued a decision regarding appellant Naegele Outdoor Advertising’s entitlement to relocation benefits for several advertising signs. Naegele appealed the MCDA’s decision to district court and also sued for conversion. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the MCDA on the conversion claim and dismissed Naegele’s direct appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, reasoning that Naegele should have appealed by writ of certiorari to this court. We affirm.
FACTS
The MCDA acquired 26 locations upon…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Offerdahl v. University of Minnesota Hospitals & ClinicsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Dietz v. Dodge CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
- Abdallah, Inc. v. MartinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
- Larson v. Archer-Daniels-Midland Co. Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1948
- Oakman v. City of EvelethSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Wax 'N Works v. City of St. PaulCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2000
- City of Minneapolis v. MeldahlCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2000
- Mowry v. YoungCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1997
- Heideman v. Metropolitan Airports CommissionCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1996
- In Re Relocation Benefits of James Bros. Furniture, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2002
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.