Legal Opinion

Bennett v. Beaty

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 13, 1923No. 23,448PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.

The city of St. Cloud operates under a home rule charter. Its governing body consists of three persons, called the city commission, whose powers in regard to streets are thus conferred: “The Commission shall have power to care for, supervise and control, to name and re-name, to lay out, alter, widen, extend, straighten and narrow, to open, construct, re-construct, build, re-build, maintain, repair and close to travel, to grade and re-grade, to curb, re-curb and gutter, to pave, re-pave and macadamize, to clean, park, beautify and otherwise improve, to cause the same to be done, at such times…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Smith v. McDowellIllinois Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Diamond v. City of MankatoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
  3. Vanderburgh v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
  4. St. Vincent Female Orphan Asylum v. City of TroyNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
  5. Brazil v. County of SibleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1918

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State and R. R. W. H. Comm. v. M. St. L. R. R.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
  2. Kuehn v. Village of MahtomediSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1940
  3. Lieser v. Town of St. MartinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1959
  4. Packard v. County of Otter TailSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
  5. Rolf v. Town of HancockSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API